Re: [Int-area] [ih] Fwd: Existing use of IP protocol 114 (any 0-hop protocol)

"Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com> Fri, 20 September 2019 17:38 UTC

Return-Path: <agmalis@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 330B61201E5 for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 10:38:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 tja0O7AZhVXB for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 10:37:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk1-x72d.google.com (mail-qk1-x72d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72d]) (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 1A19D120099 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 10:37:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk1-x72d.google.com with SMTP id 201so8060290qkd.13 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 10:37:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=KtfKA9eXtjBOM4yLpYBD0squC0h9Rplh6FgxBzXASV0=; b=AkD8Rvtneq3hrmkD5rCb3oOb/PRTuDWff0kB/vcXzwCaZmBOhzIGFsc3A8HNHRyGOi PDSOYFSTGdiYnfylFTY1FM+CBarDlD+/wyX924uM0zjpQ84Q3pnL4d8dvD+ZLIJu96G/ BU9SKJC2SYA8s1owyvFn3edMHhHbDjilwUmhKy6oL2lLvQwQopRBA6F4uIK60TPRP4JA jxDRbgKxBVPG4Ilg+0Q1GiGVWv2RDxRMqOSRywVp1igN2qXXKM2KvGlhGtiHm+qqr1eP See77BE+Zc3lWvxjjMjz0255RuWhlsCmMYo1tCynfjBv9jeTU+80zUCHc19nqQS6XU1O vsgw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=KtfKA9eXtjBOM4yLpYBD0squC0h9Rplh6FgxBzXASV0=; b=sbSJy7h9W6Im9R/JzdkJbk424O+fmdEfJdyZ3OmN3cIgfoVlvfQXSH4JibGx2cawAr ZxJSi0VucgocrfIi1WUAM1+Lq41ZdQ8srez1fJxjxcZaoXSVYwOXy9VmI4zgtjrASgNZ iO9t2DE1RVbKhSNM/iAlU4LCkRQHq+9ZfXYjE1V+U6RWEZ7YdRdVF20dO2k9cZWdXBX4 8gUCDA6q0J/3rjl2L7uvxW9hz1NYBCgfiQNmIbOeVpFt24GtxkQFBNINL7wYa79ijMdH CJ1YWBbFX08YVDx42FdUIwgWmy8Ed0eF3/QqvkABPniWUNktXSqv5sOkjfv+6rOkBLIk Z0hw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXpt0GhFY7jBp5EGmvuRRCXvGj3147cBBRSH/Ns/Io3Chh1u6EB 6ChwUX9NMgBUczbjyA1JtIe6NEOZeHnk23H5n9A=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzHXUVeKF8udeUnfadlxKsasC64uV/9Yy7on29lzmvgvpu1XSAwmls7n705y2rTlZx1jwr1G0KsQmAYr7TI4Rk=
X-Received: by 2002:a37:691:: with SMTP id 139mr4959669qkg.476.1569001076179; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 10:37:56 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <D6BD6D0F-9504-4533-BCFD-A79B2357BC96@cisco.com> <88ec7bdb-57e7-5966-6deb-b9e9ba8d7b67@gmail.com> <416.1568937724@hop.toad.com> <CAC8QAcfQd-n1bVWOhXRQEMW_Z=DPNzrYPUEdZrAHCL-MuXYXyQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAC8QAcfQd-n1bVWOhXRQEMW_Z=DPNzrYPUEdZrAHCL-MuXYXyQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 13:37:45 -0400
Message-ID: <CAA=duU0x8+jPWwHu1qTc-40zjrySKjAdVpSnMBWaTwPJ2nrJvg@mail.gmail.com>
To: sarikaya <sarikaya@ieee.org>
Cc: John Gilmore <gnu@toad.com>, Internet History <internet-history@postel.org>, Internet Area <int-area@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000cc63290592ff87b2"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/QlVysEPumja-amWA1IXpKX7DPWY>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] [ih] Fwd: Existing use of IP protocol 114 (any 0-hop protocol)
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <int-area.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/int-area/>
List-Post: <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 17:38:00 -0000

Behcet,

That was a historical list. The current assignments are in
https://www.iana.org/assignments/protocol-numbers/protocol-numbers.xhtml .
If you want to go garbage collecting, that's the place to start.

Cheers,
Andy


On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 10:25 AM Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 7:02 PM John Gilmore <gnu@toad.com> wrote:
>
>> Protocol 114 was unassigned in RFC 1700 in Oct 1994, which was the last
>> RFC tabulating protocol assignments.  In January 2002, RFCs ceased being
>> published for protocol number assignments, according to RFC 3232.
>> Sometime before Feb 1999, protocol 114 was assigned here:
>>
>>
>> https://web.archive.org/web/19990203044112/http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments/protocol-numbers
>> <https://web.archive.org/web/19990203044112/http://www.isi..edu/in-notes/iana/assignments/protocol-numbers>
>>
>>
>
> I looked at this document.
> It looks like many listed there are no longer used/exist.
> Maybe deprecating them and thereby making the numbers available for
> assignment seem like something IETF/IESG can do?
>
> Behcet
>
>> The original IANA, Jon Postel, died on October 16, 1998.  There was some
>> turmoil in the relevant websites at the time.  The Internet Archive's
>> Wayback Machine does not appear to have captured the IANA.org or isi.edu
>> websites during an earlier time when this protocol number was not
>> assigned.  But, only five assignments in Feb 1999 had followed 114; the
>> next one was L2TP (protocol 115) by Bernard Aboba (April 1998).  The
>> preceding one was PGM (protocol 113) by Tony Speakman in January 1998.
>> So it's a pretty good bet that it was assigned by Postel between January
>> and April 1998.
>>
>> (L2TP was documented in RFC 2661 of August 1999, and by that point it was
>> not using protocol #115; it ran over IP and UDP on port 1701.  A later
>> 2005 evolution of L2TP, L2TPv3, used protocol 115.)
>>
>> Does anyone have archives of the TCP-IP Distribution List from 1998?
>> The only copy I have found so far is at
>> http://securitydigest.org/tcp-ip/ but it ends in 1994 (with no apparent
>> "we're closing down the list" messages).
>>
>> A separate issue:
>>
>> Having read the draft-zhu-intarea-gma-03.txt, and skimmed the 2017
>> draft-kanugovi-intarea-mams-protocol-03 that it references, I don't see
>> how this protocol could in any way be seen as a 0-hop protocol.  The
>> whole design is to provide multiple paths to the Internet, which would
>> require that the relevant packets traverse routers.  The MAMS draft
>> explicitly says "MAMS routes user plane data packets at the IP layer".
>> 0-hop protocols only operate on a single LAN and cannot be routed, by
>> definition.  (ARP, DHCP or its predecessor BOOTP are examples of 0-hop
>> protocols.)
>>
>> Therefore, I think this draft should not be using protocol 114.
>>
>>         John
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Int-area mailing list
>> Int-area@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> Int-area@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
>