Re: I-D Action: draft-voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion-02.txt

神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp> Fri, 01 December 2017 19:40 UTC

Return-Path: <jinmei.tatuya@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4AB8126CB6; Fri, 1 Dec 2017 11:40:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 L0w27bhgeFjR; Fri, 1 Dec 2017 11:40:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm0-x244.google.com (mail-wm0-x244.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::244]) (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 C0D82124D85; Fri, 1 Dec 2017 11:40:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wm0-x244.google.com with SMTP id n138so5416159wmg.2; Fri, 01 Dec 2017 11:40:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=CZNcYBnHjUNqhJ16Wv5i5Ht3BVwHQSmLy4s5G8RKJZE=; b=rphvdPm6KCIv+Wh4f7Iuy4pUE9dv5UjCMEdCsXKMG6/S+q1vfGv7z8+QDkSMszBt0o VpQrvi2ppkLDSqI/pd2ubAF3Yxqy3rGPoEYx/P3wulSQXfVzM5ehuq211UMYSKUXuSZH v9F2TyEkoW9H/Ck32BHoldYS8yR4poExSYyNivenot9DB3+poiGlHe7Z+rvHX+k3fzzG xWNXOnI7WmPZ15IHy28LSbP360d5sV27aUTI4eOKpGpGq46B2EzgAu6XtYuYOFn5dO16 mYU6m3Yqa37bPOdkOTHw1GmnxX7lGCLuM5PM9aKRgbneshfCwO88mkjfpOIYacXbrncq 8Vzg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=CZNcYBnHjUNqhJ16Wv5i5Ht3BVwHQSmLy4s5G8RKJZE=; b=CsKZ0dAiczwVkXPGdf6JNZWXRojhkI8pY+srTM2hGlup6/nrylNVuwxqf+TIi+bLNS jqZ+F9SM+C6uVWH6ny+7nKOAnSLYUaofUsu1bO99O4Il7Pu/l2EQmlV/YeL2QCA32uX5 LzE5D6TGo0powbqBcE130vLrBm3gdaE9OZxxcx/TmnU6qoVpPom24ylLFWi3Cm8WFfgG ufwlzcsEgZXz1eqR/dwTxzpzZxxgL5xOTTSTh2WipU4PCzh6/P3yL2ILzKC6xM+Clqlh KxLBj+LLTyl3eEmG4r+CbATx9E8cUdxydcyVjowFLyEQomDiT3hBU0TyAj2dDAdxoKGd ZTyw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mLmkSeGkZ6ErQgoQwJqYP8FbGgiLj0xRbWUgCfN41+nDuKnIUMV +N/IyjZV1ybVKJs62VUBaP0jy3+oYIeEXIbeNN4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMbnng6ksoTiazsP9/TCDiyH/tTehVwNLM02ulK2EgBwsMisMzczRXgYd7kqiUTOCsxxNHtEXmJkEyzbf/uDPHI=
X-Received: by 10.28.211.15 with SMTP id k15mr2220829wmg.33.1512157210066; Fri, 01 Dec 2017 11:40:10 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: jinmei.tatuya@gmail.com
Received: by 10.223.185.107 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Dec 2017 11:40:09 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CALx6S36xijvHF2nKEEcZCZMdTS0+XLBpMiPGW2YZKYMYjSi9dw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <151120281628.21912.1099097760493570225@ietfa.amsl.com> <4ca3fd6b-4cd6-f6ac-ce03-415c2c9a4c3c@gmail.com> <f4425076-2f76-5713-2819-9d26671d56bb@si6networks.com> <4E92F160-C586-4C7B-BAEF-97C204856A8A@employees.org> <bc9d7f57-8687-7f85-8ac3-49751683232b@si6networks.com> <CA+b+ERnKbRXgFycgKd7EXMVvS1Mu_RTC5tfPbNE781TDZ49rYA@mail.gmail.com> <CAO42Z2wWSucKNouo0RxNf7pmyPErNk1bVny43qTLY6E333mpcQ@mail.gmail.com> <e41ee3ae-05ef-0a1a-505e-968323b07625@gmail.com> <CALx6S36xijvHF2nKEEcZCZMdTS0+XLBpMiPGW2YZKYMYjSi9dw@mail.gmail.com>
From: 神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp>
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2017 11:40:09 -0800
X-Google-Sender-Auth: AvyXXtNnLxFJ76r_mjJa7_KpVeQ
Message-ID: <CAJE_bqfappCsO98XnOXU9+TBf7GEXb4fcJpXkamTLHADWLCXuw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion-02.txt
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, draft-voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion@ietf.org, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/-usKo66Dpyy7I6iuYsQayjImL-I>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2017 19:40:14 -0000

At Thu, 30 Nov 2017 17:03:08 -0800,
Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> wrote:

> > What I'm seeing in this thread are rational arguments for and against
> > the proposal. I agree about the logical fallacy in the abstract of the
> > current draft, but that's fixable with a few seconds use of the cursor
> > and Delete key. I'd like to see the rational arguments in the next version
> > of the draft.
> >
> It's not just the abstact that promote the logical fallacy, it occurs
> elsewhere in the draft. For instance:
>
> "Obviously, this FRR service increases the size of the packet during
> its journey within domain D.  This is well-known to operators.
> Well-known mitigation techniques have been deployed for more than 15
> years"
>
> This seems like a pretty useless statement in a protocol
> specification. Either the mitigations should be articulated here or
> the applicable RFCs describing them should be referenced.

+1, or, I would not necessarily say it's a "fallacy" but the current
form of draft is unnecessarily defensive and provocative, while it
doesn't sufficiently provide *technical* answer to questions that was
raised for the proposal, most notably "why not just encapsulation".

I'm happy to help the proposal move forward (although whether I
finally support it depends on technical details), but right now the
tone and technical substance of the draft don't suggest I can
constructively contribute to the discussion.  As Brian put it, I
basically "stopped reading the draft" once I knew it didn't contain
much useful information and didn't even bother to point it out at this
ML.  I suspect there are some others who had the same impression and
took the same (in)action.  Hopefully the next version will be improved
substantially, incorporating the points discussed in this thread, then
I'll be happy to review it more closely.

--
JINMEI, Tatuya