itojun2.0 (RE: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues)
itojun@itojun.org (Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino 2.0) Fri, 27 April 2007 13:57 UTC
Return-path: <ipv6-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HhQxQ-00079q-6R; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 09:57:56 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HhQxO-00078r-4D; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 09:57:54 -0400
Received: from coconut.itojun.org ([2001:240:501:0:204:23ff:fecb:8908]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HhQxM-0001iL-Sh; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 09:57:54 -0400
Received: by coconut.itojun.org (Postfix, from userid 501) id DDA281C060; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 22:57:49 +0900 (JST)
To: alh-ietf@tndh.net, iesg@ietf.org, iab@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 26 Apr 2007 15:52:07 -0700" <017501c78855$84a6f380$8df4da80$@net>
References: <017501c78855$84a6f380$8df4da80$@net>
X-Mailer: Cue version 0.8 (070406-1309/itojun)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii"
Message-Id: <20070427135749.DDA281C060@coconut.itojun.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 22:57:49 +0900
From: itojun@itojun.org
X-Spam-Score: -2.8 (--)
X-Scan-Signature: 2beba50d0fcdeee5f091c59f204d4365
Cc: funya@sfc.wide.ad.jp, ipv6@ietf.org, gert@space.net, deraadt@openbsd.org
Subject: itojun2.0 (RE: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues)
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IP Version 6 Working Group \(ipv6\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ipv6-bounces@ietf.org
even though Japanese, itojun2.0 is much like Theo so bare with me. i will use quite a language, so it's X-rated. and for those who didn't know, theo finally plan about enabling INET6 on cvs.openbsd.org and studying jinmei/shima/qingli book. our 15 years of effort was not a waste! then this doomsday news. how ironical. > > > > That's a BSD bug, not a standard bug. no, both. RFC problem: - standard introduced mistake in RFC1883 -> RFC2460 (dropped loose/strict bit, at the same time maxhop/rthdr0 bumped to 128) for this hinden or deering needs harakiri - no limit in # routing headers in packet diagram just show typical header ordering not limitation so it's a big pitfall. in a very small font "you can put as many routing headers in a packet"!! for ths i guess deering harakiri exercise: how many hops you can make if link MTU=1280? or 9000? - even HOST must forward rthdr (we have checked w/ Steve 1000 times so KAME does not need harakiri, Deering is) implementation support - we were too spec conformant :-) - didn't know hinden/deering are spec writer, no coder they may have code when they were young, but in 1995 they had grandchild or big kid - forcused too much onto IPv6, forgot about 1992 common sense "routing header considered harmful" (another ironical coindidence, INET92 kobe was where ipng effort was started). because IPv4 option was dead from the beginning (WIDE"s mobility protocol, VIP, used IPv4 option and it could not reach the States due to banned IPv4 option for this one, KAME needs to harakiri. with this doomsday situation and feel of guilt, how can i (or kame) take even a nap? that's why you see i keep posting and posting. deering is total slacker because he's in canada fishing Salmon!! i tried very hard to reach the author, and hinden came to us with total non-understanding and optimism when tomorrow is the doomsday. how do you think? nokia people, someone is trying to impersonate lovely hinden. if i'm wrong and it was real hinden he sent to SM club and spanked by thousands of dominas before harakiri. but that's may actually what makes him happy. but joy of SM and bondage world will finish by harakiri, we gladly allow him to enjoy SM and bondage. now, think about how IETF work as ex-IAB: in IPv4 days: - implement and test - then write a draft or, - BSD IPv4 code is there - everyone cheated and looked at it today: - write a draft with pipe dream - spam IESG - then implement - big issue happen - go back to 1 now, in KAME we meant to make t-shirt "code then spec, not spec then code' clearly KAME made successful "spec then code", but it was because Jun Murai bawed million (if not billion) times to get people like jinmei (he's ICHIRO or GOILLA MATSUI of toshiba), kazu (in project management he is also ICHIRO) and me (king of v6, jinmei beats me in careful spec reading because i'm spine-coder and nanosleep guy) to make "IPv6 samurais", which is IPv6. and we seriously we devoted our very lives onto that i was dumped by two or three girlfriends. that guilt adds up. then spice domestic violence by father, knowledge of DNA and darwin theory (hate father, then hate myself because half of my blood is toilet water), you have a guy with mental illness. yes, that's very reason you do not bump into me at IETF venue. too much computing hurts you, i know, but to deploy IPv6 in "spec then code" way we need a Kamikaze attack by IPv6 samurais. let us assume 2^128 was not enough. another set of harakiri and feel guilt. i would go suicide. not suicide attack, but the game hangman. to summarize, to stop this kind of doomsday spec issue we have to switch our mind from "spec then code" to "code then spec". require 2 interoperable independent implementation to submit draft. effects are: - robust protocol - much fewer drafts - no spam-like loony tune drafts - iesg hapy - iesg queue flushes quickly so, everyone will happy. if you object, you can call me any time, i won't be able to sleep until very last IPv6-capable machine gets upgraded. hope it will finish before i become zombie. i leave "code then spec" discussion to current IESG/IAB. at least IESG will be extremely happy about it. do not hesitate to cc: me, if it is IAB/IESG and email amount moderate so that i can handle rthdr0. i'm an ex IAB, so keep me in the loop. thanks for reading this rant. itojun PS: "itojun2.0" is like "Web2.0". i.e. i know how to control adrenaline rush, i now forgot about my father completely. i slack sometimes when my friend calls me so do not worry. noone but me can work and post 24x7 without sleeping. PPS: no need to send "please sleep" letters to me, i got plenty of them already. i need to read rthdr0 spams so i do not need more spams. i do know you all love me and i love you all, it's just the feel of guilt which keeps me awake. and my next door neighbor is my doctor so i don't need to even call ambulance. and if tomorrow is doomsday, what do you care? harakiri? kamikaze? family? no, i do not have family i'm alone so only people who cries when i die would be theo and IPv6 samurais and of course, "Father of Japanese net", Jun Murai, IAB 1992-94. PPPS: i'm not crazy. i'm quite sane. i'm king of v6. the mental illness story is real. if you think you can beat me you ay fuck my anal and suck my dick, or perform scull fuck. or you can check with jinmei, who is the only guy beats me. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
- IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Jeroen Massar
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Jari Arkko
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues George V. Neville-Neil
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Mohacsi Janos
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues David Malone
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Remi Denis-Courmont
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Paul Vixie
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Rob Austein
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Tim Enos
- Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routin… Bob Hinden
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Perry Lorier
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… David Malone
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… David Malone
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Ed Jankiewicz
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Gert Doering
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Gert Doering
- RE: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Manfredi, Albert E
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino 2.0
- RE: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Tony Hain
- RE: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Tony Hain
- RE: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Tony Hain
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… james woodyatt
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… james woodyatt
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues George V. Neville-Neil
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Alun Evans
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Jeroen Massar
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues David Malone
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino 2.0
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Ebalard, Arnaud
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Ignatios Souvatzis
- itojun2.0 (RE: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues) Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino 2.0
- Re: itojun2.0 (RE: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header iss… Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino 2.0
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Jari Arkko
- RE: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Manfredi, Albert E
- RE: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Tony Hain
- RE: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Dave Thaler
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Tim Hartrick
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino 2.0
- RE: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino 2.0
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino 2.0
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Theo de Raadt
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Bob Hinden
- RE: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Pekka Savola
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Pars Mutaf
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Theo de Raadt
- RE: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Dave Thaler
- RE: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino 2.0
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Eric Klein
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues james woodyatt
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Roger Jorgensen
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Jeroen Massar
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Paul Vixie
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Eric Klein
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues George V. Neville-Neil
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Ebalard, Arnaud
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues gnn
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Mini
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Jeroen Massar
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on [Re: IPv6 Type 0 Ro… Eric Klein
- Re: Question for IPv6 w.g. on Kenjiro Cho
- Re: itojun2.0 (RE: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header iss… Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino 2.0
- Re: itojun2.0 (RE: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header iss… Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino 2.0
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues David Malone
- Re: IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header issues Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino 2.0