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

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Thu, 27 February 2020 22:58 UTC

Return-Path: <fgont@si6networks.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 364C53A0778; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 14:58:53 -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, 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 kWOnCI2nQlg7; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 14:58:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fgont.go6lab.si (fgont.go6lab.si [91.239.96.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CD7053A07E5; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 14:58:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.10] (unknown [181.45.84.85]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by fgont.go6lab.si (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5500E8067A; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 23:58:48 +0100 (CET)
To: Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, Internet Architecture Board <iab@iab.org>, Internet Area <int-area@ietf.org>, architecture-discuss@iab.org
References: <876c9105-3da4-e614-2db0-bea025b54663@si6networks.com> <7749f91f-03f1-cc14-bae8-5fe68c88879f@si6networks.com> <CAOW+2dsNQLsyw3ohgYhXNBGA_Ziruh+z5ieQB3a7bhPrce6-OQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Message-ID: <caee3e5c-f6f6-2cc8-420f-1c8e4f0afb99@si6networks.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 19:58:25 -0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAOW+2dsNQLsyw3ohgYhXNBGA_Ziruh+z5ieQB3a7bhPrce6-OQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/v5qi-9OQS8pClycS0JrFBI80aCM>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] [arch-d] 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: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 22:59:00 -0000

On 27/2/20 19:43, Bernard Aboba wrote:
> Fernando --
> 
> "the proponents have argued that "we have implemented it,
> and the industry wants it" -- as if we just have to rubberstamp what
> they have done."
> 
> [BA] The IETF has no enforcement authority, so that vendors have the 
> ability to ship products implementing IETF standards in whole or in part 
> - or not at all.  

Agreed. The problem here is that it's an *IETF* working group 
rubber-stamping what a vendor did. *That* is the problem.

May I ask what is the point of bothering publishing specs if they are 
going to be violated at will *within the same organization that 
published the specs*.


As noted by Jinmei here 
<https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/XZ_D_cfPNNzXpi4_ZbuTidMTo4k/> 
, I believe not only are we just rubber-stamping stuff, but also I 
believe that our processes are being circumvented.

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492