IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Running code (Was: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6only-flag-03.txt)

Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> Thu, 01 November 2018 00:29 UTC

Return-Path: <eckert@i4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
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 34BA812D4F0 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 17:29:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.952
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.952 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-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 ix3nhK0oBlgv for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 17:29:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD25E1286D9 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 17:29:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [IPv6:2001:638:a000:4134::ffff:52]) by faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA2CE548137; Thu, 1 Nov 2018 01:29:48 +0100 (CET)
Received: by faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 10463) id C8BDA440210; Thu, 1 Nov 2018 01:29:48 +0100 (CET)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2018 01:29:48 +0100
From: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Cc: Simon Hobson <linux@thehobsons.co.uk>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Running code (Was: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6only-flag-03.txt)
Message-ID: <20181101002948.o2rwrkfntbkaz6ll@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
References: <acb0984ec73b40c9a350a0d144b23835@boeing.com> <20181030183416.wfv47m63w5xk3cqe@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <143d790e624d498c91fbf69b070da007@boeing.com> <20181030210020.66dppz77jeowp722@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <87651dfca4694f599e67abbc593f1787@boeing.com> <7FFB03B9-2629-47D1-A3D1-E4FDD6937BC3@thehobsons.co.uk> <CAO42Z2xeqJN3_MSx8Z5cY_kmVDfm-4C7oWKPbnecbC2Fww6UJw@mail.gmail.com> <E74C0E26-87B6-403E-8052-BD6533C1D79B@thehobsons.co.uk> <20181031154737.3errng2ifcmmzcve@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <c10c8cd9-73b4-645b-fafe-9cbd2db673b2@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <c10c8cd9-73b4-645b-fafe-9cbd2db673b2@gmail.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/2rCkKVaZak9B7rHJH2wjZH8qDcg>
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, 01 Nov 2018 00:29:56 -0000

On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 12:04:41PM +1300, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> > I have not seen sufficient discussion concluding that this flag
> > can not be autoconfigured by routers.
> 
> The router cannot perceive the *intention* of the network administrator.
> (Not until NMRG and ANIMA have finally decide what "Intent" is, anyway. ;-)

Haha. Lets not rathole on Intent here ;-)
Yes, agreed, but the autoconfigured part i was suggesting would IMHO not
be intent but an always-correct autoconfiguration that hosts SHOULD follow.

> > Right. either we're able to specify explicit algorithms
> > for things or we're just doing a half-baked job.
> 
> That isn't really in scope for this draft though. I think we probably have
> far too much text in the draft already.

Its true that the mechanisms/algo on routers to autoconfigre the flag
would be more text but it would provide one strong reason for the flag
that does not depend on operator intent and could threefore make the
flag stronger.

I am happy if the flag  draft would go through as is unchanged though
because the automatic mechanism on routers can always be added later. I
just brought it up to show how the flag does not need to depend on
complex analysis/intent by the operator.

Cheers
    Toerless
> 
>      Brian
> 
> > 
> > Also i thought you have to say NN/DL/AI and not "heuristic" to
> > get funding ;-)
> > 
> > Cheers
> >    Toerless
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> >> ipv6@ietf.org
> >> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
---
tte@cs.fau.de

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email