IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Accurate history [Re: "professional" in an IETF context]

Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com> Fri, 05 November 2021 12:09 UTC

Return-Path: <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C68A63A0DC5 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Nov 2021 05:09:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=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=gmail.com
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 yUQXrsPuoxgo for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Nov 2021 05:09:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x430.google.com (mail-wr1-x430.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::430]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6909B3A0DBC for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Nov 2021 05:09:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x430.google.com with SMTP id c4so13356845wrd.9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 05 Nov 2021 05:09:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=v4VcVJ8rHkFJR9mW2Bx7xZDIJ9BVuY1AIvb/TbFDvLU=; b=d9dXuyoWKHLjAxhWENyGgmQZpcMj/WbMbuBZWjkrL1VfEhdhYxj8NMK3aaNMqwW9aC M0jikSlkyY+wHQFtXwImX0JWWARAGmaxbRZKzuTAO0A2ebn0/tg9qoMtCUBzruzWX+E3 VQc9xjn8XqxMZoOAlaNxDyYcrIr80zXWADOtGjWk69aLf+nXrDELUsu501qAuLbHxrLJ xr9eme4eE+5DizwNJ7LkVUfPJrFQlbGhbAJLTyxYcOVbXelF1/k7aie1utLAGSJ/KBRf KSnsqR66hyYHdnor0+8Hsj9MOULk88/8a/deduT4Mhyl1kOXo0bD4Y89OEKyTg3/cl+M IA/A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=v4VcVJ8rHkFJR9mW2Bx7xZDIJ9BVuY1AIvb/TbFDvLU=; b=HfD0NuTP9O2Pk9NdJ42CMUytdr53RBz3KqT+HSrRmRr6/C0cRrs7jaexraUMa90lSu qgDg4rktC8T90ppdw1nUoz/dDG/nT/LSMZW/reVL2Bac7nW0Kc0tolt5rWOxhpIaRCaF gRWVGOTaYQlrfrrt4m2FTP2zRR4QF9veQRiMi9WQMuA6MHPhtplLhcHwcfh1zKZ4C24R u/OV3Thzvd29KIN3YQ4G3VJAXKkUlpQAwkltHe3S1+AmKfpogTAvQbu5bPyvhc2RTaga D3Eo4y5c3pmix+sTb1dKcEKIusSozHcuPX3EJVm0Dnuahlx1McjUKDWY05HFqFmZhnOq gL8g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531e4kr2QtivLThwNTyFaiUWhDDSn9tioCrXJ4anvFUZgQD81FBv hQ2q+jg7a2GRLIBaxq+r4akMZFKzQ60=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy3EWjXWRJ/TSWFyRpWg+bFlpc8cbGtrJSGjfpVL3QxahqfFnzRz/eaeAWvTvZxIu86Z46OFw==
X-Received: by 2002:adf:ba0d:: with SMTP id o13mr72674702wrg.339.1636114181869; Fri, 05 Nov 2021 05:09:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([185.69.144.20]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u23sm302892wru.21.2021.11.05.05.09.41 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 05 Nov 2021 05:09:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <E285424F-7E21-47BF-8235-BF9710F1593C@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_2CEB6501-E85F-49E0-9A72-BF957D2C85D6"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.120.0.1.13\))
Subject: Re: Accurate history [Re: "professional" in an IETF context]
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2021 12:09:40 +0000
In-Reply-To: <f6ecd8af8e0040869e152b086e041a42@huawei.com>
Cc: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>, Scott Bradner <sob@sobco.com>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
To: Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com>
References: <8F4B97EA-665F-4A59-B99D-791B4AB9F2F7@yahoo.co.uk> <3e685576-a230-a7c4-f371-d66a55aa820d@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <7a087707-499f-e3bf-8701-1a58930a8a22@meetinghouse.net> <4ec32d7a-a17b-635b-91bc-4152313d6800@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <885e62bf-7d6a-4501-a48a-e7c2cbf20382@joelhalpern.com> <e59adb61-a55c-7f5f-a60a-40bf186c139d@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <CAC8QAceMSrfkqGTYcMNr3JargO3gxJqTaEyf02LGHd-KVeUDHw@mail.gmail.com> <6286da3e-2beb-9556-089a-2e1951573b1e@gmail.com> <59c80b60-438f-b10f-ad61-ba839f6e4f95@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <e834916e85ea47ef94fce07c23928d2b@huawei.com> <37b299c8-e821-07e5-6240-68fb9d1ca137@gmail.com> <23b450fb11eb4a51bb4ee837b5c52657@huawei.com> <a805b50d-3ccd-dd2a-4931-6c6dc9a8ede3@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <CAC8QAceY1gtK5v3WGMd4OB0z826jDiDDw_g1LbjWef7MKTnrcg@mail.gmail.com> <7d6af5bc-9663-7e4e-26ba-23fb1e4dccbe@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <7238184A-53D6-42C3-B9C3-E333513A8636@sobco.com> <513d8f63-78c6-50ca-9d11-ee128af0d202@foobar.org> <f6ecd8af8e0040869e152b086e041a42@huawei.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.120.0.1.13)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/1vNEEUvIqxTEU_Lo_jFp1yNt1Vc>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2021 12:09:53 -0000


> On 5 Nov 2021, at 11:10, Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> What is important: Enterprises have no clear sign of IPv6 adoption.
> ND protocol has a heavy influence on this.
> Of course, ND is not the only reason. But maybe the biggest one.

Indeed, and I have had a consistent complaint from a British security conscious large private sector technology savvy company, that IPv6 is so much harder to secure than IPv4 they have no interest in moving. I think that part of this is the conflict between the privacy that IPv6 offers and their need to know that *every* packet on their network is entitled to be there doing what it is doing.

- Stewart

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email