IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Next steps on Extension Header Insertion

otroan@employees.org Thu, 03 November 2016 11:25 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
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 835251299B8 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Nov 2016 04:25:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.962
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.962 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_SORBS_WEB=3.297, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=employees.org; domainkeys=pass (1024-bit key) header.from=otroan@employees.org header.d=employees.org
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 ZC4rT0EqSNVr for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Nov 2016 04:25:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from inbound03.kjsl.com (inbound03.kjsl.com [IPv6:2001:1868:a100:131::62]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 735FE129971 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Nov 2016 04:25:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cowbell.employees.org ([65.50.211.142]) by ironport03.kjsl.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 03 Nov 2016 11:24:59 +0000
Received: from cowbell.employees.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cowbell.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A10089CC51; Thu, 3 Nov 2016 04:24:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=employees.org; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s= selector1; bh=7tWBsTEcQpHMrvkLSjqlNjfcz/4=; b=eZ0xBwwlA93k7NDj17 eVhizn6XqSnREVXhntESHTq2cZF7NI3h2+mc5uQlL2nH+01yaBG58xcfuEHLMoQt 5WTO0w9IAKekg7TCPbzXDXi5JbdGc4/eorR12c9HNFV75SA0h3L+FZGy1an2chpt iCDTs4WOqE9XYRS1gJSFGsS6E=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=employees.org; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; q=dns; s= selector1; b=Mey9s0z1djoh6JDUPksi//AaA5PzuegO3xg3hGRLWM0T1/ptLm2 w2SvXFg0Z5dC8bBQr3c5C53stwNwzgwIw9Fnd6UWmeLEnv/BHNwV5aGvOqeWrJ5a TAGNjRqxcM8IRsR6HMVFzy0hWmdqTwNxELfl5Bl7w+i21J+uK428Ufi0=
Received: from h.hanazo.no (unknown [85.19.205.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: otroan) by cowbell.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 646239CC0F; Thu, 3 Nov 2016 04:24:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by h.hanazo.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44CA55939886; Thu, 3 Nov 2016 12:24:57 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.1 \(3251\))
Subject: Re: Next steps on Extension Header Insertion
From: otroan@employees.org
In-Reply-To: <17984D1D-1A3C-4AA5-B2EC-BE5C645A272C@steffann.nl>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2016 12:24:57 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <369FB219-9979-43CE-B83D-D7C422FC7711@employees.org>
References: <B291E9E6-A803-423F-BFA5-87A74DCFB784@gmail.com> <dfe00826-1bcd-80ae-e6dc-7763c506cbe4@si6networks.com> <9CA73891-B4FA-47DF-82E1-A4867DBC6A3F@steffann.nl> <3C56AA77-18E4-4254-BB6A-A447CE115392@employees.org> <CAG6TeAtJdUua3saSGz0SX7DW6hwf74yAexpnfYoP1bg6v1eywA@mail.gmail.com> <17984D1D-1A3C-4AA5-B2EC-BE5C645A272C@steffann.nl>
To: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3251)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/S8GU9Ys4NlURqt2_iU98D2PZTNU>
Cc: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 03 Nov 2016 11:25:03 -0000

>> If IPsec, Path-MTU, and normal troubleshooting could all break as a resultar of this, yes, we do have a say, and we should say so
>> 
> As an operator these are the things I care about. I want predictable networking that I can debug. I understand the politics, but I think this issue is important enough to state in the core protocol RFCs.

To paraphrase Michael Moore: "If you as a man is against gay marriage, then you do have the option of not marrying another man".
In this context; you have the choice of not deploying any packet mangling middleboxes.

Cheers,
Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email