Re: [Autoconf] RFC 5889 (Was: Call for comments to a new AUTOCONF charter proposal)

"Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com> Thu, 22 July 2010 08:47 UTC

Return-Path: <Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com>
X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B994B3A69DD for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 01:47:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.4
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.4 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.290, BAYES_05=-1.11, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id v5mPZzi9Iu4f for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 01:47:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ukmta3.baesystems.com (ukmta3.baesystems.com [20.133.40.55]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 759903A6784 for <autoconf@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 01:47:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.55,242,1278284400"; d="scan'208";a="77795057"
Received: from unknown (HELO baemasodc004.greenlnk.net) ([10.108.36.11]) by Baemasodc001ir.sharelnk.net with ESMTP; 22 Jul 2010 09:47:53 +0100
Received: from glkms1103.GREENLNK.NET (glkms1103.greenlnk.net [10.108.36.194]) by baemasodc004.greenlnk.net (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id o6M8lqwr002428; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 09:47:52 +0100
Received: from GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET ([10.15.184.93]) by glkms1103.GREENLNK.NET with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 22 Jul 2010 09:47:52 +0100
x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 09:47:51 +0100
Message-ID: <ABE739C5ADAC9A41ACCC72DF366B719D0344F7B9@GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET>
In-Reply-To: <4C473D4C.8050504@gmail.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
thread-topic: [Autoconf] RFC 5889 (Was: Call for comments to a new AUTOCONF charter proposal)
thread-index: AcspAzlkRg0UEV6oQ8OELKyzrJ5LbgAdgEmQ
References: <4C2A6BB7.1000900@piuha.net><4C2CFADD.3040909@piuha.net> <4C378C29.2040302@oracle.com><4C4706D8.5040904@piuha.net> <4C473D4C.8050504@gmail.com>
From: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com>
To: "Alexandru Petrescu" <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>, <autoconf@ietf.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Jul 2010 08:47:52.0925 (UTC) FILETIME=[926850D0:01CB297A]
Subject: Re: [Autoconf] RFC 5889 (Was: Call for comments to a new AUTOCONF charter proposal)
X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list <autoconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf>, <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/autoconf>
List-Post: <mailto:autoconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf>, <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 08:47:39 -0000

Alexandru
(But I'm just quoting this for convenience. It's not really specific
to this text.)
> It could be solved by simply saying that "link-local addresses can and
> are being used by routing protocols and stateless and stateful address
> auto-configuration" and "IPv4 link-local addresses are in widespread
use
> on e.g. Bluetooth with ActiveSync on numerous small wireless mobile
> devices; OSs in widespread use self-configure IPv4 and IPv6 link-local
> addresses upon startup, w/o means to forbid this self configuration".

This is a very worrying trend. This document is in AUTH48, it's been
accepted by the WG and the IESG. Even the original edits proposed
(especially the third) were beyond what I understand what AUTH48 is
about, which is minor editorial changes. Now we are discussing a
title change and fundamental wording that took years to thrash out
a compromise that can't possibly be overturned in an AUTH48 context.
I think it's time to make either the original first two edits, or no
edits at all, and issue. Anyone who wants to propose an alternative
addressing model can write a new Internet Draft and push it down the
Independent Submission track.

-- 
Christopher Dearlove
Technology Leader, Communications Group
Networks, Security and Information Systems Department
BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
Tel: +44 1245 242194  Fax: +44 1245 242124

BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87,
Farnborough Aerospace Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687

********************************************************************
This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
distribute its contents to any other person.
********************************************************************