Re: [spring] Is srv6 PSP a good idea

Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> Wed, 26 February 2020 20:25 UTC

Return-Path: <sander@steffann.nl>
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 75FBC3A1396; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 12:25:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, 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 (1024-bit key) header.d=steffann.nl
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 IICyxndEBoPp; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 12:25:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.sintact.nl (mail.sintact.nl [83.247.10.6]) (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 530433A1393; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 12:25:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BDF54B; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 21:24:35 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=steffann.nl; h= x-mailer:references:message-id:date:date:in-reply-to:from:from :subject:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-type:received :received; s=mail; t=1582748673; bh=lkTCBBssA+K+R6SF1cTDg/oCUEGB KdiTSovZylzuVdw=; b=D2FVsA+P+b1o8GHKaibZg3bBcpI8z4YPWLfHMr99/wGw JsxRJM7hGC9zCQvRcJeYq6LAmuVIRWKUhj/PkcsQygWWlBQJoe4YrvaD5bo9lne8 nmuRMhEMyBnGk8hdEhXUg5pgoeeOLNIv4rGRWxqeQUn5GXbif/VE+xqU0eTkZgc=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.sintact.nl
Received: from mail.sintact.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.sintact.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id gmIy-y6_W59J; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 21:24:33 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [IPv6:2a02:a213:a300:ce80:e1db:2079:7e02:1779] (unknown [IPv6:2a02:a213:a300:ce80:e1db:2079:7e02:1779]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9DBB23C; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 21:24:32 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_7DA64945-FC9D-4113-9CD8-712B6686189E"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3594.4.19\))
Subject: Re: [spring] Is srv6 PSP a good idea
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
From: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
X-Priority: 3
In-Reply-To: <626312047.530170.1582748522771@webmail.networksolutionsemail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 21:24:31 +0100
Cc: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>, Sander Steffann <sander@retevia.net>, spring@ietf.org, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <2C1C557C-5698-4A11-8F29-7BECC99C8EDD@steffann.nl>
References: <7B51F0BE-CE40-42B8-9D87-0B764B6E00C5@steffann.nl> <47B4D89B-D752-4F4C-8226-41FCB0A610F0@retevia.net> <CAOj+MMGYtGOi2n_E57TTfD_3kWvkqWGWhhfev4Z2GVwJD5oSnQ@mail.gmail.com> <e0fb41cc-b830-3c72-c03d-591f9ff0722b@si6networks.com> <626312047.530170.1582748522771@webmail.networksolutionsemail.com>
To: "john leddy.net" <john@leddy.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3594.4.19)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/EKiGBvTvTdAfIWniWh3rP9s3G3Y>
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: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 20:25:13 -0000

Hi John,

> I would suggest that people read RFC 7282 - "On Consensus and Humming in the IETF"...
> 
> My question is: How do you reach Consensus when the complaint is about how many milliseconds it takes to shoot down a proposal?
> 
> Is this about the proposal or the vendor involved?

Definitely the proposal. That a vendor seems to have an inappropriate amount of influence on the IETF process is just an additional concern.

Cheers,
Sander