IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: L=0 [was draft-pioxfolks-6man-pio-exclusive-bit-02.txt]

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Sun, 04 February 2018 03:49 UTC

Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
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 06342126DC2 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 3 Feb 2018 19:49:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.311
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.311 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=swm.pp.se
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 bvn8j9AmxSJt for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 3 Feb 2018 19:49:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (swm.pp.se [212.247.200.143]) (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 CBC7512420B for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 3 Feb 2018 19:49:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 6C9C7B2; Sun, 4 Feb 2018 04:49:11 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1517716151; bh=jrCeDlq/4Wx1LzWc2eKcANXPxtXp+/EMGPMiv+XTSWM=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=ROs0N60P0OEY6+unAgGOajo/Ymhh8TaLA/vn8pdva9Mfz6L3p1TkGWzRkww2JLamT DnDeaqhaoCAOivzbBz9aDriCkX7op1Yxij0KuIfV+j/DvTEogihmHjYxnDnLew3WiW /kYI9ioezetVvpUCuPiLCrEB8cvLw6JRYjyO6FMk=
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52D30B1; Sun, 4 Feb 2018 04:49:11 +0100 (CET)
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2018 04:49:11 +0100
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>
cc: 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: L=0 [was draft-pioxfolks-6man-pio-exclusive-bit-02.txt]
In-Reply-To: <CAO42Z2y0eWRcNDuSkXg8FQ1XiFMkmU50xRVrqkWKTs-KmBXqAg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1802040443140.8884@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <91953634-9B4A-405B-AB36-FBB2079A0A40@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr3fSUt0jf71m+v6MBfxadsiUtemJKhpazFbZFk1a1DASw@mail.gmail.com> <1CBC2CBA-8076-46BC-A24D-5920C32111F0@google.com> <205AB90F-2B9A-4E3E-B2C9-792E4FAEFEEB@google.com> <18854.1517233055@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <1345.1517236806@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <a57696ee-47c3-5de1-c5b4-223c8b11d912@gmail.com> <CAO42Z2w0gd6C7qGpF2rhRAPaMG1nZMU9cPm0yRD6cZBr53EhgA@mail.gmail.com> <44C1900B-5CAA-4EF8-A405-EBE87871DCAC@employees.org> <CAO42Z2worXnmmTEx7_g_R1kuoywc40O0Yo7b6Bf4cdLJ70=rFA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1801300611070.8884@uplift.swm.pp.se> <CAO42Z2ydjfsvL0ita9TW8Hgrqfd30E6BSPAf0DmLn0cZaCt3tg@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1801311042240.8884@uplift.swm.pp.se> <CAO42Z2zRRnV-Uc2PAg3KOYGyDTer7beWMXev_jYn1Lx5uRi9vw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1802010956570.8884@uplift.swm.pp.se> <CAO42Z2y0eWRcNDuSkXg8FQ1XiFMkmU50xRVrqkWKTs-KmBXqAg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/ReaCfH3yhM8EjcvlrDmRo76bx9o>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Sun, 04 Feb 2018 03:49:16 -0000

On Sun, 4 Feb 2018, Mark Smith wrote:

> Why are people trying to put multiple entirely untrusted hosts within the
> same IPv6 subnet/on the same link that assumes implicit host trust?

.... and here's why some things are never standardized in the IETF yet 
it's still in use by millions of subscribers. Vendors produce 
functionality that people put in their RFPs, not what people showing up in 
the IETF thinks makes sense to them.

I could give you the reasons why some people do this, but I imagine you'd 
just reject them as being "wrong". And from a puritan point of view, you'd 
probably be correct.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email