IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OPSEC] Last Call: <draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-eh-filtering-06.txt> (Recommendations on the Filtering of IPv6 Packets Containing IPv6 Extension Headers) to Informational RFC

"C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com> Mon, 26 November 2018 23:38 UTC

Return-Path: <heard@pobox.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 1FEA4130FD0; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 15:38:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com; domainkeys=pass (1024-bit key) header.from=heard@pobox.com header.d=pobox.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 RBJmSMkU00E1; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 15:38:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (pb-smtp2.pobox.com [64.147.108.71]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73EA512DF72; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 15:38:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C2B2115F0B; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 18:38:37 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=mime-version :references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc :content-type; s=sasl; bh=l91tbgbrX/LhKxegQW5x5Ol0NJE=; b=upSRdd 5E2NAqKRVGxxRP72gqLnbhzq0/2VPyi9Fvrh4GB34XpIWya3KiFOZAPEZmAP+M9R olGwZXsDX0ydCsMpXbnRW2/ZhkCVxyle3b/+egr57aBDfdaHHud8SAC2gwlnu2TI Tp8RV6uVXGLLKg45MuN+5KXwQICW4GJkcySaw=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=mime-version :references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=eY8eTHTCgkxc2J2RTQBkUaj9DoU4Gbzq nYnlgxadPB3uVEdDpKse1C9s05uqUVFhIFVPvch9gN67AiTle/k6OSj0SSeuxc8x slRgIDdsVf3BCllFQ2nGpWwAAinDXnm8HLrDRXMDGPI2PbX8Rub3PEqQGz6I3wlp oHkLO5OC7W0=
Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 153F6115F0A; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 18:38:37 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mail-it1-f177.google.com (unknown [209.85.166.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9EEEB115F07; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 18:38:36 -0500 (EST)
Received: by mail-it1-f177.google.com with SMTP id h193so30873129ita.5; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 15:38:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWYRBap+S3NO1gqtYrHlbJeR6kbP9Y3o2kNh4+V+7E7sO+NTh2HC jWAZJUj1fW90gpAX72qJm7lesUKYYLzEL86Q4Zs=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/VtEy61CGyAcjupuZyT3Ytb323TcB7/6an4rXdjr0U40eD5ksK4Lso0RoA46rdsKdCpqfR0zyLXP6K9SO+j18o=
X-Received: by 2002:a24:eb0b:: with SMTP id h11mr25442297itj.138.1543275515875; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 15:38:35 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CACL_3VExxwN6z-WHbp3dcdLNV1JMVf=sgMVzh-k0shNJFeADbQ@mail.gmail.com> <BLUPR0501MB2051A8FFB1DAFDCA9873B9E6AE700@BLUPR0501MB2051.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CACL_3VFSHqU-D+NJu=k2-p4tbjZukT7i7WEoX+5kdUtdHB4Rjw@mail.gmail.com> <CACL_3VGk0CsHObEgSwLdCp8agOWrjccB94-aynEz3Bv0w+EU+w@mail.gmail.com> <475fe28a-aafe-d3b0-e665-fe97dd1439b8@foobar.org> <CACL_3VGHWW8fCDo8Q9br2fwXn5zBi+kN_5a1sOTX7m7QaU8iyg@mail.gmail.com> <3dc898de-6a18-4106-52fd-36cb8f60b19b@gmail.com> <f2784abe-d5b5-a556-3cfa-63481a7a8929@foobar.org> <CACL_3VGqhc-gFhbGJNm9XjZRXHpv9yZ3e4CurmT2P-VpQuVi3w@mail.gmail.com> <40f9b0b3-f9fd-fc09-dad1-3e575df791a3@si6networks.com> <CACL_3VHnUZwcG2=QbJ8HZf6nqiYv8qXxK8cOkuBmdX3QsKfPNg@mail.gmail.com> <12480906-A488-477E-BAE9-B7E22FD34060@gmail.com> <fcdbc3d1-9b60-0a38-6b7f-4321249da4d7@foobar.org>
In-Reply-To: <fcdbc3d1-9b60-0a38-6b7f-4321249da4d7@foobar.org>
From: "C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 15:38:24 -0800
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CACL_3VF5hweAcCAta9o7BttGz+Psot_L7NX+P-GFWSqrvy6QLw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACL_3VF5hweAcCAta9o7BttGz+Psot_L7NX+P-GFWSqrvy6QLw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [OPSEC] Last Call: <draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-eh-filtering-06.txt> (Recommendations on the Filtering of IPv6 Packets Containing IPv6 Extension Headers) to Informational RFC
To: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, OPSEC <opsec@ietf.org>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 651DE500-F1D4-11E8-B4C8-BFB3E64BB12D-06080547!pb-smtp2.pobox.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/IVWGRJUP88QVSYauwauUo6pAvf8>
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: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 23:38:40 -0000

Bob Hinden wrote on 26/11/2018 22:49:
> I wonder if this is something the IETF needs to tell operators.
> Based on the discussion, I suspect it is not.

Probably not :-)

On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 3:10 PM Nick Hilliard replied:
> The draft is useful and should be published with Brian's and Mike's
> wording suggestions: some operators will read it and use it to inform
> themselves.

Indeed, I think that the document does a pretty good job of setting
forth operational impacts of filtering policies, and that (rather than
any specific filtering advice) is where most of the utility lies.

> It's also useful to document how protocol specification choices can
> cause implementation difficulties.

That would be a good thing to document. However, since the document
is aimed at operators, not equipment implementors, that would
probably be considered out of scope.

Thanks,

Mike Heard

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email