RE: One size fits all !?! (was: Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people come from?)
"Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> Fri, 29 May 2020 19:04 UTC
Return-Path: <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.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 5AC7D3A0FDA for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 May 2020 12:04:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, PLING_QUERY=0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=boeing.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 W-gFsFdpWLcr for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 May 2020 12:04:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from clt-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (clt-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net [130.76.144.162]) (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 487513A0FD6 for <6man@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 May 2020 12:04:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by clt-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (8.15.2/8.15.2/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id 04TJ47Uq023642; Fri, 29 May 2020 15:04:09 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=boeing.com; s=boeing-s1912; t=1590779049; bh=S8Z6+s5yeCU4/pktd3F1VljtaAiWjDl5u5noaVYTri0=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Hy5hTmVdTM1mqpsaTn8qjaYXAZgBJ8/an+JHy65pJVEUL/lRmWrqY8v9AG/4lDmWF p3/unXSigmgdA9ZfKmbsZ9J9SZqG+FkduliYZPbjAP+Jsh9+zuydal7ZrUWXNVsCGg VnEvzyehZuGoBjD0ipNQk0bwCUr1ozt9Tbq2TL1HHpKr6jR4S9ertqsxT/NRzjhoII lshkoJug9l4xB55wdY5IWvgeR72IiPBnDS5v3lJpGb889DJl55QLG6kTTgnX7ZjUxx 7ViJCradTti3Omxy2kZGNXbXWnLqK/K5F6LQrZbXqelAR/u5pZuBuZRLpEvu06HJH3 8iSnlXScx6gzw==
Received: from XCH16-07-09.nos.boeing.com (xch16-07-09.nos.boeing.com [144.115.66.111]) by clt-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (8.15.2/8.15.2/8.15.2/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTPS id 04TJ44Re023615 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 29 May 2020 15:04:04 -0400
Received: from XCH16-07-10.nos.boeing.com (144.115.66.112) by XCH16-07-09.nos.boeing.com (144.115.66.111) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.1.1979.3; Fri, 29 May 2020 12:04:03 -0700
Received: from XCH16-07-10.nos.boeing.com ([fe80::e065:4e77:ac47:d9a8]) by XCH16-07-10.nos.boeing.com ([fe80::e065:4e77:ac47:d9a8%2]) with mapi id 15.01.1979.003; Fri, 29 May 2020 12:04:03 -0700
From: "Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
To: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
CC: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>, 6MAN <6man@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: One size fits all !?! (was: Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people come from?)
Thread-Topic: One size fits all !?! (was: Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people come from?)
Thread-Index: AQHWNdxxX0X8NhgHhkOb7Wes8Gwgg6i/UfLggACL1oD//43KIA==
Date: Fri, 29 May 2020 19:04:03 +0000
Message-ID: <0be6ee97591742d7b0ea31f7d6821e4d@boeing.com>
References: <CAO42Z2xDygUXTGwVunGSTMkZGMF8VePrPaXLSAJg14vAJdca5A@mail.gmail.com> <6DB604C0-2C29-44A8-AB01-DA697552C7DA@employees.org> <1C1F0496-33A8-4646-B356-369EA9ABAD33@gmail.com> <DM6PR05MB6348501B266FF51DD805C25DAE8F0@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <70CDD965-C9B4-4A15-9ACA-FFE685D97129@gmail.com> <7AC15DBA-17DD-4CF7-95C1-0F1C6775BF30@fugue.com> <20200529171234.GY62020@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <780e1c824e204003a944d152415278f8@boeing.com> <20200529185052.GA62020@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
In-Reply-To: <20200529185052.GA62020@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [137.137.12.6]
x-tm-snts-smtp: AEA8BF42A863CF65779F2B9548F63BAAD5D686750B1C3E4891585E983A1F90E62000:8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/8j9BmlmHRPGAS_hpbn4DDNIap68>
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: Fri, 29 May 2020 19:04:13 -0000
Seems like a well-balanced consideration Toerless, which is definitely not what was attempted with IPv8. Thanks - Fred > -----Original Message----- > From: Toerless Eckert [mailto:tte@cs.fau.de] > Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 11:51 AM > To: Templin (US), Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> > Cc: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>; 6MAN <6man@ietf.org> > Subject: Re: One size fits all !?! (was: Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people come from?) > > On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 05:36:11PM +0000, Templin (US), Fred L wrote: > > Sounds like another call for IPv8 - we had that same discussion back around > > Y2K. It seems in keeping with networking technologies in general that it takes > > about two decades for history to repeat itself. > > IMHO Not quite. IPv4 in the mid-90th was like a global pandemic that triggered > a mass extinction event for almost all other network layers. AppleTalk, DecNET, > CLNP, X.25/CONP, XNS, SNA, ... ("IPv4, the best pandemic ever" ;-) > > IPv6 was designed to kill & replace IPv4, and even tried to enforce > it with sunsetv4 later on, aka: follow your "history repeats itself" model. > That was well intentioned but in hindsight unrealistic. I think we learned > that what happened with IPv4 will never repeat itself and can not be engineered > by standards decree. > > Therefore, I don't think we could be successfull with periodic "kill & replace" > IMHO we should have a strategy for evolution more like how e.g.: window 10 is > managed, instead of repeating microsofts experience with the failing > kill&replace through win7 and win8. Maybe first think about expansion > through market segment profiles. > > I for once wouldn't bother changing the Internet profile (RFC8200) > right now, but just think what the best incremental additional profile > for e.g.: controlled inter-networks would be that could be added incrementally > to networks where Internet profile is already running. This friendly > co-existance is already standard practice for hundreds of millions > of users anyhow for the parts of network technology where we do not > need new standards. > > Cheers > Toerless > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: ipv6 [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Toerless Eckert > > > Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 10:13 AM > > > To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> > > > Cc: 6MAN <6man@ietf.org> > > > Subject: One size fits all !?! (was: Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people come from?) > > > > > > To me the main issue is that all the discussions about possible > > > improvements of IPv6 steering headers (all the options out there) > > > do nothing but monopolize precious industry cycles into tactical > > > issues instead of also addressing the strategic problems with IPv6 > > > that go way beyond optimizing steering header encoding. > > > > > > IMHO, it is a misguided dogma to think that RFC8200 128 bit > > > addresses IPv6 is a one-size-fits-all solution not only for > > > what it was built for, the Internet, but also all arbitrary controlled > > > networks - for the infinite future! > > > > > > IoT with IPv6 is an extreme pain (header compression, MTU). > > > Most controlled networks do not even want global addresses (security, > > > segment based app-gateway architectures, ...). > > > 16-bit/32-bit/48-bit address sizes would be highly desirable. > > > Even the 1980'th CLNP network protocol had variable sized addresses. > > > IPv6 has not solved core problems to be even equal to L2 switching: > > > plug routers together, get automatic connectivity, no bother about addresses. > > > CLNP was a lot closer to that goal too. > > > > > > We have no "maintenance-only" constraint in IETF multicast, > > > yet for unicast network layer we only permit maintenance or > > > else you need to create another WG for just a sub-problem. > > > How silly of a structure is that ? And please do not create > > > an IPv6.00001 working group, but think really about another > > > instance of IPv6-NG, but this time backward compatible. > > > > > > And do not let a vendor force the hand of the IETF by developing > > > and deploying proprietary solutions first. We know how bad that works from > > > ongoing work in other layers, as well as historic examples. > > > > > > If we continue to proliferate this "one-size-fits-all" myth, > > > then we are just continuing to extend our own version of > > > a winchester mystery house and kill our industry. > > > > > > On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 10:30:01AM -0400, Ted Lemon wrote: > > > > On May 29, 2020, at 10:17 AM, Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > My main point was that a list discussion of this type rarely reaches an acceptable outcome, and that an objective discussion at > IETF > > > is normally a better approach. Indeed resolving issues like this is exactly why we meet F2F at IETF. > > > > > > > > My experience with this is more that working group chairs are quite active in moderating discussions during in-person meetings, > and > > > really tend not to take responsibility for doing that on the mailing list. This produces the effect you???ve observed, that it???s > easier > > > to get consensus in-person than on the list. > > > > > > > > This is unfortunate; if the chairs took a more active role on the list, considering the cost of the time it takes for participants with > > > coding jobs to follow multi-hundred-post repetitive arguments, we would probably do a better job of reaching consensus on-list. > > > > > > > > Of course, this is a lot of work, and it???s sort of understandable that it doesn???t happen; my point is simply that if we want to > be > > > an effective _online_ organization, maybe we need to start doing things a bit differently. > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > > > > ipv6@ietf.org > > > > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > -- > > > --- > > > tte@cs.fau.de > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > > > ipv6@ietf.org > > > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > --- > tte@cs.fau.de
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Philip Homburg
- So where have all these new 6man WG people come f… Mark Smith
- RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Andrew Alston
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… tom petch
- RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Voyer, Daniel
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… otroan
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Alexandre Petrescu
- RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Templin (US), Fred L
- RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Voyer, Daniel
- RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Templin (US), Fred L
- RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Bernier, Daniel
- RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Andrew Alston
- RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Templin (US), Fred L
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Nick Hilliard
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Xing Li
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Sander Steffann
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… otroan
- RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Adrian Farrel
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… 神明達哉
- RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Voyer, Daniel
- RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Ron Bonica
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Fernando Gont
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Turchanyi Geza
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Greg Mirsky
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Brian E Carpenter
- RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Templin (US), Fred L
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Andrew Alston
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
- Need a journalist (Re: So where have all these ne… Carsten Bormann
- Re: Need a journalist (Re: So where have all thes… Ca By
- RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Andrew Alston
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Robert Raszuk
- RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Andrew Alston
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Robert Raszuk
- RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Andrew Alston
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Robert Raszuk
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Stewart Bryant
- RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Ron Bonica
- RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Templin (US), Fred L
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Stewart Bryant
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Fred Baker
- RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Voyer, Daniel
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Ted Lemon
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Jared Mauch
- RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Ron Bonica
- One size fits all !?! (was: Re: So where have all… Toerless Eckert
- RE: One size fits all !?! (was: Re: So where have… Templin (US), Fred L
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Greg Mirsky
- Re: One size fits all !?! (was: Re: So where have… Toerless Eckert
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Greg Mirsky
- RE: One size fits all !?! (was: Re: So where have… Templin (US), Fred L
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Mark Smith
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Robert Raszuk
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Mark Smith
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Robert Raszuk
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Ole Troan
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Stewart Bryant
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Stewart Bryant
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Carsten Bormann
- Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people co… Toerless Eckert
- Re: One size fits all !?! (was: Re: So where have… Philip Homburg
- RE: One size fits all !?! (was: Re: So where have… Templin (US), Fred L
- Re: One size fits all !?! (was: Re: So where have… John Scudder
- RE: One size fits all !?! (was: Re: So where have… Templin (US), Fred L
- Re: One size fits all !?! (was: Re: So where have… Philip Homburg