IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Int-area] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-intarea-probe-07

Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Tue, 05 December 2017 18:35 UTC

Return-Path: <jmh@joelhalpern.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 0F65B129440 for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Dec 2017 10:35:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.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 JALIyB0iN-u2 for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Dec 2017 10:35:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from maila2.tigertech.net (maila2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.152]) (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 DBEA912708C for <int-area@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Dec 2017 10:35:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBF86AA00AA for <int-area@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Dec 2017 10:35:50 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=1.tigertech; t=1512498950; bh=78soEKegw38qUUpWO21T41W388uaiI3V33LgOZ7wcag=; h=From:Subject:To:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=H6N2gz3ABluqxfIZCcmJSlCK6xN9vAZUvoboZv054POIPJOT14R5Xq5R2wJqLVU/E /RYxE0F7fS0MhU3Zh75mRqjPWNsM+wr8RcC049jqxHSF1mk6GzEe+fji9d1g4m9Q7O nIICuzFfDXnujId5P14JwEXlQoo4KW63u9iswLeA=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at maila2.tigertech.net
Received: from Joels-MacBook-Pro.local (unknown [50.225.209.67]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5F820AA00C0 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Dec 2017 10:35:50 -0800 (PST)
From: Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
To: Internet Area <int-area@ietf.org>
References: <151207827781.25922.11037452280009787600@ietfa.amsl.com> <BLUPR0501MB205123A6FAFFAC15461D1845AE3C0@BLUPR0501MB2051.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <5fabd8f9-9663-4c7f-370b-6095f999b7b2@joelhalpern.com> <BLUPR0501MB2051CA127D79FF9ED62C2D2FAE3C0@BLUPR0501MB2051.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <0c4b98c8-7f1a-ce25-2619-2db279d58d62@joelhalpern.com> <BLUPR0501MB20512A80167AF961676D4E6AAE3D0@BLUPR0501MB2051.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <01d6a506-bc38-ee6c-d938-176512d9a8cd@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2017 13:35:48 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <BLUPR0501MB20512A80167AF961676D4E6AAE3D0@BLUPR0501MB2051.namprd05.prod.outlook.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/yAXjW8njcoKnJmql6AUAQjddoZk>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-intarea-probe-07
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Tue, 05 Dec 2017 18:35:52 -0000

I followed up with Ron on this a bit off-list to try to understand the 
goal of the E (or P) bit.  (My understanding was clealry not a show 
stopper for advancing the draft.)  After some explanation, I asked the 
following question  (Ron suggested I send it to the list.)

It seems you are trying to provide clarity for the neither F nor S case?
If one had a pure bridge, with IP control, that supported this probe 
mechanism, couldn't you get the same "neither F nor S" answer?  Or an 
ATM switch, or ...?

Yours,
Joel

O

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email