Re: IETF Last Call conclusion for draft-ietf-6man-rfc2460bis-08

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Fri, 31 March 2017 14:11 UTC

Return-Path: <rraszuk@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 2ABB51294C4; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 07:11:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.4
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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 3vyqiAFLmcsP; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 07:11:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io0-x235.google.com (mail-io0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::235]) (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 2C9C1120326; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 07:11:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io0-x235.google.com with SMTP id z13so40406491iof.2; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 07:11:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=isEinDZ38WgcjmpNWTQ4PfYWjZqcWehhG/DenmXpiAo=; b=OGSIjlCAx/OjgRJXpISH1EpwT//PF1SfwRtQ6U97zd0C/nVcpBQNyrgehGVO5kdO83 CBePvRHHpeYZGCcjgBnj6gwy3cQ9SXZvrRWYTDGLtBGN37F6aFL9idZOfvVgE5OOFm2L aZxkimlTIAe1UqbXvkE+gNm0D0Fxq65cw89UbjHhl0iSjqpsUHOLKCcwDYUHg8Oe3c2H r/Eou2WVdFiAO48h2VJPw+DPzYl4RVHxtbCxNrJTV4J5bSFu5uFCEDkXidJahE9plnpN 8+B7e7gY40DuIUnQ+eW/PdhrPtV3iZlJonWIwFt/7fIB1tXGtmaNoM+7DGmBNXJJuI6k R9CA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=isEinDZ38WgcjmpNWTQ4PfYWjZqcWehhG/DenmXpiAo=; b=VFvpdFhyUOwZ4kqni8Ol4QRfJttVqxRXEA7ubO4SXhLHPibRtyFSE3RBGRilawCJYa 2LRP6knSUUE69LzPre7vvth3mxXOKUgHilCb7b+95VaJB/FBlsZmcPrZvFq3cDT49/Kb jMk5ZTvfMRPn7z4O8QGWcxaE1eydF/yCqVGdnjpNHEDX92chYYbnDVjbeyG8OU888puT ynWxSUQJ/t1ujZnzepqYJHUWT+6Ue8gYimzwKUOeWy9sNwk8du7BV59i/baj0UHD7FBN pOvSi/tIGK3ZEU9OpT9zT0zTgPskrW5zi8r6Xka+kPH7wu9Mk2O8Lt2agkRjHET3Ofxa Opyw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H00BZAn8rSQFiGn9OFP+JFQGn5d6cNs41R1lgjDY2TJErvblWIJ5zM7MjpX6x4aB4eUMKQlqMArGON1vQ==
X-Received: by 10.107.7.29 with SMTP id 29mr3384195ioh.57.1490969506524; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 07:11:46 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: rraszuk@gmail.com
Received: by 10.79.90.71 with HTTP; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 07:11:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.79.90.71 with HTTP; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 07:11:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <0ae6ba21-0529-e9ca-ab74-b18a85acad4a@gmail.com>
References: <599257D7-532D-4512-929B-D124623EAF35@ericsson.com> <6B662F87-B0E6-4613-B406-8A22CA95DFA5@cisco.com> <4917F161-2EC8-43E0-AF4C-BFAEE44A492C@cable.comcast.com> <198e3116-5448-2fdf-4da7-4811a0133f05@gmail.com> <50E4A84C-F0ED-45ED-AA89-5713CBD8F9E0@gmail.com> <5aebc8ed-f873-94e9-1ae4-dab7b3a8ebef@gmail.com> <CA+b+ERk8kHWyBY3GPp21-pgrL_SsShaLkrn4UdecFeQPYamSEg@mail.gmail.com> <A0F19A98-7DBE-4616-B949-529ED2A81D62@ericsson.com> <CA+b+ERk_cKGB6a0SQd560cMiOzT4KbSic6fCCwQWrhNkNEcO3Q@mail.gmail.com> <76ABEAE0-6A89-4C69-82ED-968F949A3B19@employees.org> <CA+b+ERmqpRuw0z4ZQkhNYfEqGvqEJKYwM0hkuWg8dZrYXT4DdQ@mail.gmail.com> <FCFFDDCF-7A53-41E2-B414-53E568C92B35@employees.org> <CA+b+ERmELF1p_5vX_nqhB58Bm8c34N6=kkijuCRYkfkQcfKneQ@mail.gmail.com> <0ae6ba21-0529-e9ca-ab74-b18a85acad4a@gmail.com>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 09:11:45 -0500
X-Google-Sender-Auth: cEXM4wMcBvEXKRslhp9ltl33Am4
Message-ID: <CA+b+ERm7vO-ZpSHKLvY+BfgWpMa7+abKR6BFnXkgUuUPEXYVEg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: IETF Last Call conclusion for draft-ietf-6man-rfc2460bis-08
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Cc: "Leddy, John" <John_Leddy@comcast.com>, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, otroan@employees.org, "draft-ietf-6man-rfc2460bis.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-6man-rfc2460bis.all@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113ea6f0ced7e1054c0763df
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/UyWDlsFzeFDaRP59R2ppJowJDfM>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 31 Mar 2017 14:11:49 -0000

I do not understand how 2460bis makes it "easier" if proposed change to the
text directly tries to prohibit what is described in a document already
long time back accepted as a 6man working group draft.

That's to the best of my memory an IETF precedent.

Cheers,
R.

On Mar 30, 2017 16:50, "Brian E Carpenter" <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
wrote:

On 31/03/2017 10:13, Robert Raszuk wrote:
> What's wrong or what is missing in
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header-05
>
> ?

Once we get 2460bis out of the door, we should seriously tackle that
question.
Honestly it's going to be easier then. I perhaps disagree with Ole whether
we
need an Updates: 2460bis but that depends on the details.

    Brian