Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Architecture? (Fwd: Errata #5933 for RFC8200)
Joseph Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Sat, 29 February 2020 01:55 UTC
Return-Path: <touch@strayalpha.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 E16753A0915; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:55:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.318
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.318 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=strayalpha.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 IFUIEFNwxRyN; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:55:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from server217-3.web-hosting.com (server217-3.web-hosting.com [198.54.115.226]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C10523A0913; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:55:47 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=strayalpha.com; s=default; h=To:References:Message-Id:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To: From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=X5IcYCh1TgOb92GJ5QcDsTedG637m5w4dIVKafa5D0E=; b=0PYoK+bv67ImmsehFa7P67ApN gb3s8wCqi/RtB9Vntecp/og+ylAMGJokyA/pPmglvX0PYcJ03fgCHocITjAuhagG2H49+Vd5tfaE3 ZUkU/EkXlRctNaj2YZsscBHYKQuYXI0Gz6GCqTVCEdqCM6IfHE/PSv17SHpUVjoOKrM6+hggwKznM Szv6VBAFV1LJWAU7UHPWyfuk8mBJ6CIgasL4DB5qJub+Gws9RV+lH8AdsF1UbAWm+WC2QADbrGnSK aMJAoDf+7++eL4oN53qZd/dv0U+QtAmSrKAtPe0VEU4gFYWQh0fHqoyqYiQAExkXGAFekA2vC36m1 Cn1xpG2xg==;
Received: from cpe-172-250-225-198.socal.res.rr.com ([172.250.225.198]:59484 helo=[192.168.1.10]) by server217.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <touch@strayalpha.com>) id 1j7rLt-000m0m-1K; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 20:55:42 -0500
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B5CB3541-5275-43E8-9448-35076BB982BE"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Joseph Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOj+MMHfKMGa7w9pkqg=2RC4XeuYk7+iHt949B3kUtc+vCeB1Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:55:36 -0800
Cc: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>, Internet Architecture Board <iab@iab.org>, architecture-discuss@iab.org, Internet Area <int-area@ietf.org>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <E85CB286-E396-45AF-A7E3-5600B66297CD@strayalpha.com>
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>
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server217.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - strayalpha.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server217.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: server217.web-hosting.com: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/mOqKORUxO_vZV1d_fFk2QwlAQB4>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Architecture? (Fwd: Errata #5933 for RFC8200)
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: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 01:55:49 -0000
> On Feb 28, 2020, at 12:18 AM, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> wrote: > > > I don’t care about what you WANT to do; I care whether it breaks what everyone else expects. > > I see many folks on this colorful thread simply forgot what networks are for. To deliver packets in the most robust and resilient way to end user applications. They’re for delivering packets, agreed. I did look at the protocols involved here; the ingress does add headers but doesn’t appear to handle fragmentation. That’s a non-starter if you want your packets to traverse a network because people WILL hand you 1280-byte packets, so what will you do? Joe
- [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Architectur… Fernando Gont
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Tom Herbert
- Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P… Fernando Gont
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P… Bernard Aboba
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Tom Herbert
- Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P… Joe Touch
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Fernando Gont
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Joe Touch
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Joe Touch
- Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P… Fernando Gont
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Tom Herbert
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Joe Touch
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Fernando Gont
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Joe Touch
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Joe Touch
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Joe Touch
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Fernando Gont
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Mark Andrews
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Tom Herbert
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Christian Huitema
- Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P… Bernard Aboba
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Fernando Gont
- Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P… Fernando Gont
- Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P… Fernando Gont
- Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P… Fernando Gont
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Tom Herbert
- Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P… Dino Farinacci
- Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P… Tom Herbert
- Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P… Bernard Aboba
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Joseph Touch
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Joseph Touch
- Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P… Joseph Touch
- Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P… Fernando Gont
- [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Ar… Guntur Wiseno Putra
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Robert Raszuk
- [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Ar… Guntur Wiseno Putra
- Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P… Tom Herbert
- Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P… Tom Herbert
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Joseph Touch
- Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P… Joseph Touch
- Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P… Andrew Alston
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Fernando Gont
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Joseph Touch
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Andrew Alston
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Fernando Gont
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Fernando Gont
- Re: [Int-area] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Archite… Fernando Gont
- [Int-area] [arch-d] Is IPv6 End-to-End? R.I.P. Ar… Guntur Wiseno Putra