Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Architecture? (Fwd: Errata #5933 for RFC8200)

Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> Fri, 28 February 2020 13:40 UTC

Return-Path: <moore@network-heretics.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 6C6763A1829 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 05:40:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.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 swsEVene1Rmk for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 05:40:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7074E3A1827 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 05:40:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B74306A6; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 08:40:40 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 28 Feb 2020 08:40:40 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=D4qreZXKbOEPFB+O96MwtZMe31LAp/OZOBxpTxIxN qs=; b=LpWZmdCn2SdDAlg82ak2/yJnmdMww0QGgWLgKWLMZT/jA/aFAYudec8zG cpQivxVjel6OXd8E9VxZNjn/FzaLepyD7PjjsLupkWQPTrMoJTnJMGd1bbZvmcqc fjpSVUtg6Tlf3+KoOgg/aK/SVW3VnIGejxBLkw9e/R4vjGKGGpY3fjLAwjjTMIIW DaDi4M4x3p7aBYqP828kQlcZYL68WtT15GYlzcnNcwer+56hKrBf3HCZigD/bE9D +0IlaJWNx79PIJG7MpYUDDbiXPzVMII06Y9yklKbgF9SSHP+BJoipFM3C1wTLJ0P Uw0414UeNUvPF8IbxOpm7hCl/VFdw==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:VxhZXpVlM6wlDA7ooLh53kenAU_3DlIgE-TFENva90aJawZwZKpSUw>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrleekgdehfecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepuffvfhfhkffffgggjggtgfesthekre dttdefjeenucfhrhhomhepmfgvihhthhcuofhoohhrvgcuoehmohhorhgvsehnvghtfiho rhhkqdhhvghrvghtihgtshdrtghomheqnecukfhppedutdekrddvvddurddukedtrdduhe enucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmohho rhgvsehnvghtfihorhhkqdhhvghrvghtihgtshdrtghomh
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:VxhZXsimanYBUBSS0eC6_-hGf6Krj_DHYk6VX1tmQz7a-nMXD4wt0g> <xmx:VxhZXsLkv-AE6P6S7FGanl-UyiD8PbmBzUrJ1fuImjY4rWQrb04Qeg> <xmx:VxhZXmcv7SdOKbhQbZdilMNqwZtviYPM_yc2wQojBRoSFmVG8G-twg> <xmx:WBhZXhkjylYGKEJWHnhsgVPh4_quv43PVoblLdc9kd1dwdvSdQ1I2g>
Received: from [192.168.1.97] (108-221-180-15.lightspeed.knvltn.sbcglobal.net [108.221.180.15]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 91F8B3060F09; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 08:40:39 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Architecture? (Fwd: Errata #5933 for RFC8200)
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <876c9105-3da4-e614-2db0-bea025b54663@si6networks.com> <7749f91f-03f1-cc14-bae8-5fe68c88879f@si6networks.com> <CALx6S36wN7VEi_rxLC1ETcTvkGaPhs20KhQrGWAGGTrCL5OT+g@mail.gmail.com> <d41a94f5ede994b9e14605871f9f7140@strayalpha.com> <69bd06b8-7eee-dfbc-5476-bba0f71ae915@si6networks.com> <3c307da7e8f52b7a29037a1084daf254@strayalpha.com> <a24a3621-99f6-755d-c679-2061b9a67adf@si6networks.com> <CAOj+MMGJ11CBCov=-jfZUtROJPwhQB3A=+0gMBhzZgxoF_9N1A@mail.gmail.com> <A83D4788-AD7B-490C-B74E-2548A1345C47@strayalpha.com> <CAOj+MMHfKMGa7w9pkqg=2RC4XeuYk7+iHt949B3kUtc+vCeB1Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
Message-ID: <b6c3ad3a-509f-638f-8ee9-0d7a6e17cb89@network-heretics.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 08:40:38 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAOj+MMHfKMGa7w9pkqg=2RC4XeuYk7+iHt949B3kUtc+vCeB1Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/qykXY6YHLwRu13UAX0KOWNA5e_o>
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, 28 Feb 2020 13:40:49 -0000

On 2/28/20 3:18 AM, Robert Raszuk wrote:

> So this is not IETF business to say - no you can not do it as it may 
> sometimes fail say due to MTU.

I emphatically disagree.   IETF's job is to specify what is believed to 
work well for the Internet, and that sometimes involves making judgments 
about the relative merits of different parties' claims - e.g.  between 
one party's claimed benefit and what other people understand is likely 
to cause harm.

Keith