IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: Topic IPv6

"Tony Hain" <alh-ietf@tndh.net> Mon, 21 November 2016 21:17 UTC

Return-Path: <alh-ietf@tndh.net>
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 7B8F6129BE1 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 13:17:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.288
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.288 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1056-bit key) reason="fail (OpenSSL error: data too large for modulus)" header.d=tndh.net
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 9HmzIzhW9890 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 13:17:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from express.tndh.net (express.tndh.net [IPv6:2001:470:e930:1240:20d:56ff:fe04:4c0a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48339129BDF for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 13:17:01 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tndh.net; s=dkim; h=Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:In-Reply-To:References:Cc:To:From; bh=jO9djuQN9eEDlNFux7oHoCnUmlql3eP+0KuxgwX6+k4=; b=Axx5kBGfTqgLbd5Gaes7X1rnlZ1alzaDjTET68mDrzHQFw1O3y0mIt9l6mIju9p2q8EfxmDSXWsP0kVgtRsWawitJK9z9FIrMyyz3oZA0FO7LpVtpsaNE6p5qou4Vje37F7o8HJgNUH66ejTBLweHjANyRAtkjZ436WGYA9bAje8MCwH;
Received: from express.tndh.net ([2001:470:e930:1240:20d:56ff:fe04:4c0a] helo=eaglet) by express.tndh.net with esmtp (Exim 4.72 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <alh-ietf@tndh.net>) id 1c8vxG-000Jga-N0; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 13:16:58 -0800
From: Tony Hain <alh-ietf@tndh.net>
To: 'Michael Froomkin' <froomkin@law.miami.edu>
References: <CAGxDXJ9L-Zfu+Wn8MogOn_yKgDKKuUVyqNp5mxNYaJZd-371qA@mail.gmail.com> <20161121135800.hj773gvjquay7ka5@nic.fr> <CAGxDXJ_j+U2yngKPqK+ciHSG9B2CsTRYPq8swqbVZZBOfYB37Q@mail.gmail.com> <20161121145039.p56dd5cpczxaivyl@nic.fr> <CAGxDXJ_zAXt_QD8vpW29vShV1enXewQ1sshZfOQd+WMU17=DTA@mail.gmail.com> <CAGxDXJ-Hkvfh=E_C8ReqBE-LoN+cRR9g5d=ZnusapoNSw3i8yQ@mail.gmail.com> <04c201d24434$2329dd20$697d9760$@tndh.net> <alpine.LRH.2.00.1611211520170.27805@post.law.miami.edu>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.00.1611211520170.27805@post.law.miami.edu>
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2016 13:16:48 -0800
Message-ID: <04d401d2443c$920bf770$b623e650$@tndh.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQEHFIZdJatyRQo0dGlv2Y0NdTByXwLgUCq9AObnFA8CMJ1RAgGFAvY+As+wYGYCnwgXuQG0jXKVogVNsJA=
Content-Language: en-us
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2001:470:e930:1240:20d:56ff:fe04:4c0a
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: alh-ietf@tndh.net
Subject: RE: Topic IPv6
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on express.tndh.net)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/f2Y4pG0EmbZ1eJOaQopVZhe-Qd8>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, 'Alexander Nevalennyy' <avnevalenniy@gmail.com>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 21 Nov 2016 21:17:02 -0000

> From: Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law
> [mailto:froomkin@law.miami.edu]
> Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 12:43 PM
> To: Tony Hain
> Cc: 'Alexander Nevalennyy'; ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: Topic IPv6
> 
> On Mon, 21 Nov 2016, Tony Hain wrote:
> 
> > The IETF has taken a position that its job is creating technologies
> > and that it is someone else's job to deal with the political
> > implications of those.
> >
> 
> 
> Is that now the rule?  Have RFCs 1984 & 2804 been superseded?
> 

I believe those prove the point that the IETF believes in the definition of
technologies, and the political implications of that are left for other
organizations. Yes they take a political stand in stating that the
technology should be available to anyone, but actual availability is
delivered through the implementation, which is not in the IETF's control. 

Tony

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email