IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: about violation of standards

Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com> Thu, 18 April 2019 19:49 UTC

Return-Path: <suresh.krishnan@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 771341203E2 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 12:49:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 EKXE1LVz_fRv for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 12:49:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ua1-x929.google.com (mail-ua1-x929.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::929]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8AB0B120168 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 12:49:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ua1-x929.google.com with SMTP id h4so1139019uaj.9 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 12:49:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=0qugw1zAwn1cgv5Pzmcm5GPd34Uf96LTOjmknQcl8gI=; b=hOK0O15y8O2VNztU4K8vYffMeXXow39swyTJ4JqQlMZgA/zF7UYr7yZT4tI9u0BvzI EebExqq0JkxHe3Rl0g4sibVU+st9XeH4BdjH4t6tHwEJt0i7dzTJ2NR59yDTmPuWs1wo ccKskkGPFfQeuPojUsT6UKQlX5gwuhVooX8FdvPpIFdxiBwONkPvR6nhRDRac39Tr/// sE0MWVe/8zzJ7YygQDhn5UAQsaUOPvuHuCtp8PRgJrTTFh9pbpp/g6gwQeQzIedPsu6M OwJ7RKIqenwyCoagYkYGBFYiF/0ybhpSytO6WlUEwRtMpjzQLkrrGzs6hvETt9Eeh3pQ JpYA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=0qugw1zAwn1cgv5Pzmcm5GPd34Uf96LTOjmknQcl8gI=; b=thKqjJsyr72C0UAtqBVzhgCFLIE2mp/qrdKY8FbgEi6oGcIzRdlL0Dja+Z43B67UJp rW3cJTRRB5R/1J7CuwbtUn6m5ZM1OdFJnCjw8a0Ney46WLZxxyIVThwj9n24u5heWnKz pAbBfZT+zEMP3eCqNUlv55JcU7fFmzw4dHG91FqdKQgFjDTPCrKkPyjAG38hC6SURVmI 6yJhmV5Ah8LUTGhA27j0w2VUvMRHSDAxRqwWsBR6freM/VvTBL3LBG22SNaGuUyThQL7 NRyi4t9ft/1mVjFenExMzTdHvqDDufXk0aaFNKZUecx1QfynRp8llSIMV7l4QChQT/6F akfw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV1Icrr/KaCYN527CoN2SyqanCS1H8idh+D+9a9BtFgoVrI1A4n AGhr3zNl36KvGS/ny7KX+liDT0z4J6vWwcTJmV0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyu8F4B8rf1kyqaFskWRqY+QBfw5VwbscEYjBCHjSLzGKG/o5N94hMZtXOhVsKXzrUp04POm6LUKnAlewPO/Ns=
X-Received: by 2002:ab0:474c:: with SMTP id i12mr2193322uac.9.1555616993426; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 12:49:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <bb7f7606-2adf-e669-8bcd-e41f17800782@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <bb7f7606-2adf-e669-8bcd-e41f17800782@gmail.com>
From: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:49:42 -0400
Message-ID: <CA+MHpBr9GYo_=UcCc=CK9ExscYtzmtRs6Sy-aTKX1UjoOOk2EQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: about violation of standards
To: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Cc: IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004cc0350586d34e80"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/RGX98NS-rVu_XvUXotkK5tCan5w>
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, 18 Apr 2019 19:49:57 -0000

Hi Alex,

On Thu, Apr 18, 2019, 2:59 PM Alexandre Petrescu <
alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com wrote:

> In private conversation this debate happened:
>
> is an implementation that uses fe80:1::2 address on an interface a
> violation of standards? (RFC 4291 does not allow for '1' to be there).
>

<AD Hat on>

Yes. It is certainly a violation of the standards.


> My point of view is that as long as that mplementation is widely used,
> that is not a violation of standards.  Rather, the situation makes it
> that that standard is not in agreement with implementations.
>

If you think this is the case, the right way to do it is to fix the
standards. I do have a feeling that your implementation is an outlier here.
If you can point to a "widely used" implementation that does it please do
share.

Thanks
Suresh

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email