Re: [spring] Request to close the LC and move forward//RE: WGLC - draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Thu, 27 February 2020 08:14 UTC

Return-Path: <fgont@si6networks.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 4959D3A14F0; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 00:14:32 -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 54zV7A1Dz89G; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 00:14:31 -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 DB8DF3A14EF; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 00:14:30 -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 16A5B8286A; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 09:14:26 +0100 (CET)
Subject: Re: [spring] Request to close the LC and move forward//RE: WGLC - draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming
To: Dirk Steinberg <dirk@lapishills.com>
Cc: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, SPRING WG List <spring@ietf.org>, "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>, John Leddy <john@leddy.net>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, "Zafar Ali (zali)" <zali=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
References: <F88E3F76-DD4B-4807-A458-85FABFF20D96@gmail.com> <5D218BFB-0D6F-4F7D-858F-B571A67DC47F@leddy.net> <CAHw9_iJ_ipEvU0NUx44XbK0_DrLe_GRw6G=m+chK4wZcRP8BMg@mail.gmail.com> <ACA082A4-BC78-4C63-9F91-5C9A44F47642@cisco.com> <8abfd5a1-e806-3598-c389-8214b3d09447@si6networks.com> <CAFqxzqZgL_pg6hgW0dGbCzyjUzJdAVkfyicwTiac+8kwGxsuVw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Message-ID: <1ad33480-c296-5b76-5410-d8b57d16c478@si6networks.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 05:14:17 -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: <CAFqxzqZgL_pg6hgW0dGbCzyjUzJdAVkfyicwTiac+8kwGxsuVw@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/ipv6/28bnR1sf8H8MfUaQOCV1aVXH0G0>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 08:14:32 -0000

On 27/2/20 04:51, Dirk Steinberg wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 1:45 AM Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com 
> <mailto:fgont@si6networks.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Hello, Eric,
> 
>     On 26/2/20 20:18, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote:
>      > Writing this without any hat,
>      >
>      > Please note that on the logical side, it still have to be
>     "proven" that this idea is strictly forbidden by RFC 8200.
> 
>     Here's the proof part:
> 
>     1) Isn't IPv6 end to end?
> 
>     2) How do core components of IPv6, such as AH and PMTUD work in the
>     present of intermediate nodes that can add and/or remove arbitrary
>     extension headers?
> 
>     It should be clear from the above that EH insertion/deletion is
>     forbidden.
> 
> 
> As I already explained to you this is not true.
> The wording of RFC8200 clearly allows this.
> The node addresses by the DA of the packet can do this.

FWIW, this is not even true for PSP.

Brian raised this so many times already... but it looks like the 
procedure is busted anyway. You claim IPv6 behavior that never existed, 
you ignore objections, and a dozen of folks post "+1" as if that meant 
the issues raised had been addressed.

I have asked numerous times the same questions I asked above, and they 
have never been answered -- because we all know they make the rest obvious.

But go ahead.  I'll appeal or escalate if necessary.

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