IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: FW: New Version Notification for draft-bonica-6man-frag-deprecate-00.txt

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 25 June 2013 02:39 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.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 BA69621F9DDC for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 19:39:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.583
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.583 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.016, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t4XWqs1dwePF for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 19:39:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pb0-x235.google.com (mail-pb0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::235]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4662621F9DC9 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 19:39:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pb0-f53.google.com with SMTP id xb12so11889533pbc.12 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 19:39:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=tuym8Zy8jMEq8VtZ9OheKLfu186+j5gVgMzSipWl2vI=; b=KwaAqCK9LfDQqL1wiqrchRUhWP4f1NlINueccK7fU/IeKbuPLaBKAdhB4tIRVcRJ/V IcKkcaFwWBFuvEh+Z1SJAEFxwEBQmELkWXO/yaZpaOesCLz15Q7INSy4L7TE2WsF0kkE ULxPdfWAiUL3WyvntY8qojafYgw+1xDkxcqe0inX5phaXc/yhWIoz6gY6MCqt9OWJYhk YyORQMahVRgwpzQqZLw5w8KJOE1LyGr4Ty5FY7b+rPoPrapRmOu9qfzKyLKf21Fx7vx2 wwT0gl1XlO76WiH1qXZY4MU5HVBg2LbW9RxJ5EOdXJhpr0KdX8ykLVNu7RdNa0nALssS UcZw==
X-Received: by 10.68.189.36 with SMTP id gf4mr3910152pbc.27.1372127965006; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 19:39:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.22] (115.198.69.111.dynamic.snap.net.nz. [111.69.198.115]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id sq5sm22649957pab.11.2013.06.24.19.39.22 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 24 Jun 2013 19:39:24 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <51C902DC.9000408@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 14:39:24 +1200
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ronald Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>
Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for draft-bonica-6man-frag-deprecate-00.txt
References: <2CF4CB03E2AA464BA0982EC92A02CE2509F85151@BY2PRD0512MB653.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <51C32FA9.1090207@gmail.com> <2CF4CB03E2AA464BA0982EC92A02CE2509F85F38@BY2PRD0512MB653.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <20130624204008.GB3647@virgo.local> <20130624205226.GC3647@virgo.local> <2CF4CB03E2AA464BA0982EC92A02CE2509F8761C@BY2PRD0512MB653.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <2CF4CB03E2AA464BA0982EC92A02CE2509F8761C@BY2PRD0512MB653.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>, Arturo Servin <arturo.servin@gmail.com>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 02:39:25 -0000

On 25/06/2013 10:11, Ronald Bonica wrote:
>> "New IPv6 host implementations MAY support IPv6 fragmentation and
>> reassembly"
>> break things. "New IPv6 host implementations MAY support IPv6
>> fragmentation but MUST support reassembly" may superior. This will
>> aging out fragmentation over a longer period, new hosts will not use it
>> but existing - applications will not break.
> 
> I could live with this. Would it satisfy other folks' objections?

I think it's far too soon in developing the analysis to be able
to answer that question. This isn't cooked yet.

> 
>> "Network operators MAY filter IPv6 fragments." is a policy thing and
>> costumers have to deal with that already. So it is ok from my point of
>> view.
> 
> Ack. It is a statement of fact, not an IETF imposed requirement.

If it's a statement of fact, it shouldn't use RFC 2119 language. It
should simply state the truth: "Network operators might filter IPv6 fragments."

   Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email