Re: [Int-area] Using ISO8473 as a network layer to carry flexible addresses

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Wed, 03 March 2021 07:46 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
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 967103A1C46; Tue, 2 Mar 2021 23:46:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.919
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.919 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 eMN-dEAS-RwZ; Tue, 2 Mar 2021 23:46:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1579A3A1C44; Tue, 2 Mar 2021 23:46:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.217.123] (p5089a828.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.137.168.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Dr5f94LVtzyb8; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 08:46:09 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <6F4E6B0C717D4641A2B79BC1740D8CF4A9030885@dggemm513-mbs.china.huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2021 08:46:09 +0100
Cc: "draft-jia-flex-ip-address-structure@ietf.org" <draft-jia-flex-ip-address-structure@ietf.org>, "draft-jia-scenarios-flexible-address-structure@ietf.org" <draft-jia-scenarios-flexible-address-structure@ietf.org>, int-area <int-area@ietf.org>
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 636450368.927309-8a0306463f5a8ba777a4275bf464d13f
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <AD8FE644-6290-404F-BB0B-9B01A267B934@tzi.org>
References: <CDB32FF0-5CE0-4C0F-B1D1-B6BFEA42E817@gmail.com> <3dd5a712bd2b4fdbb882d860ab2ece82@huawei.com> <7A6DB0D7-A2A3-4995-A6D9-ABDFF4F7879B@gmail.com> <20210301153259.GB11539@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <554E7FC1-0146-4AEF-B84C-805B51013180@gmail.com> <6F4E6B0C717D4641A2B79BC1740D8CF4A902DD90@dggemm513-mbs.china.huawei.com> <D8A2DB51-FEEC-48E6-99AC-0F50D771C91A@gmail.com> <6F4E6B0C717D4641A2B79BC1740D8CF4A9030885@dggemm513-mbs.china.huawei.com>
To: "Liguangpeng (Roc, Network Technology Laboratory)" <liguangpeng@huawei.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/bAOipfP0-mmIA0vHO56DruBL6ZU>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Using ISO8473 as a network layer to carry flexible addresses
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: Wed, 03 Mar 2021 07:46:15 -0000

On 2021-03-03, at 03:42, Liguangpeng (Roc, Network Technology Laboratory) <liguangpeng@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> backwards compatible

I would suggest not to center the discussion on terms that are so overloaded that they are essentially meaningless.

Some believe “backwards compatible” means “does not break existing applications”. That is a low bar (but not trivial either).  It does not imply any form of deployability in the sense of actually making the scheme work.

Some believe “backwards compatible” means “seamlessly integrates existing infrastructure” (maybe with the exception that certain benefits do not accrue until that is upgraded).  That has essentially been the basis for all major innovation that has happened in the Internet, with the exception of IPv6 (and you know how long that took and still is taking in some parts of the world).

Terms like “backwards compatible” are, however, useful for derailing the discussion if that is one’s intention, because quickly the discussion will be about the terms and no longer about the subject.

Grüße, Carsten