IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [arch-d] A Public Option for the Core

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Mon, 17 August 2020 20:53 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B407C3A117F for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 13:53:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=uhjlJC/W; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=T+xJO1GK
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CUWPLHihVrQo for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 13:53:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3ED0C3A117B for <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 13:53:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 68189 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2020 20:53:40 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=10a5b.5f3aee54.k2008; bh=pqxi6pGWSaxxLtzEo+TtqKO5JssGFKSNo0SA0k4qxoU=; b=uhjlJC/WonV74FLIggLRvoyiIVIqSe9ZjQICk5QddSpUmGO8BCWUqaiiV8EJzUK4bkigD0hxEb5QEbmxuK747QocQeIpw+Y9lMLDUaftMZMv1FTh1aycrK2dIgCG9qtRMASg33tad4Z4r1OE8pXYUvymRqBRYFv1EDLkraYTQ2niG1DLi6vqgYPm0dEhjP3mXnlVtWkP+iXBpr/+64rUx3gToGzTVY0KUF+NT3n/OKVWnwpHTQMRO7h+rf5Ylozp0nQQGpMOtt2vMQyqOYlvpEhO7G73JpsI6JXAMK8UTh5lPUA4D5mip5+EXr9fkrj6TzphNFm9kviaTjHHojygJg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=10a5b.5f3aee54.k2008; bh=pqxi6pGWSaxxLtzEo+TtqKO5JssGFKSNo0SA0k4qxoU=; b=T+xJO1GKqhWn/RUB+1sAWYVhdwPBht6u0AnWqYF9DRiMsC4iDaF5CdFZ0YiisyvQxjZJI6HB8JkzaJJuQAUwQg2P6H5+344nJDc0C5JLUNLjHa1uE7Q19Sa0rHkp9w5J17w6S4NtzSwzm3vQ81A7lqY3O4xxyDMrqhc0mH/xMD+g3spWFpOzJKFGCuxnrsQ9iCGozVUAdDqZz7Ea7fRakjYv8KIVerHm7oPWam4e2XzOBN0OhIO5DYdF939ubWCcSaupULTBjEb61GVcrDW8QlUJbWPi6Rip4QZkYZxGQ7pAA5cbrU7TfYGafo7GPzKnK5MsEbTP1OmQ3Czsnvjn3A==
Received: from ary.local ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 17 Aug 2020 20:53:40 -0000
Received: by ary.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 593BA1EE58DA; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 16:53:40 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 16:53:40 -0400
Message-Id: <20200817205340.593BA1EE58DA@ary.local>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: architecture-discuss@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <DE7895D0-0EBB-4C78-9944-0DC203E14C37@strayalpha.com>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/_SsNAbkMRu1j_9u0wWqsTytNOSk>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] A Public Option for the Core
X-BeenThere: architecture-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: open discussion forum for long/wide-range architectural issues <architecture-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/architecture-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:architecture-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 20:53:45 -0000

In article <DE7895D0-0EBB-4C78-9944-0DC203E14C37@strayalpha.com> you write:
>As to trust, it only matters that an intermediate hasn’t forged a new header. You don’t need to trust the user - if
>they want to map their email to high-priority and pay for that usage, that’s their business (literally). If that’s more
>service than they paid for, then drop packets.

The problem is when you have networks connected A-B-C, network A sets
the header for deluxe service, then complains to B that C isn't
providing the service they're paying for.  What service? says C.

I realize that in the real world there's tons of VPNs and overlays
that provide various sorts of guarantees but they're a direct
arrangement between a customer and the network providing the service.

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email