IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IPv6 Anycast has been killed by LINUX patch in 2016 - who cares?

Brian Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Mon, 09 August 2021 09:41 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 7D58C3A0C25; Mon, 9 Aug 2021 02:41:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 Cj21_FHHjtaj; Mon, 9 Aug 2021 02:40:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-x12e.google.com (mail-lf1-x12e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12e]) (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 091DC3A0BC5; Mon, 9 Aug 2021 02:40:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-x12e.google.com with SMTP id g30so333670lfv.4; Mon, 09 Aug 2021 02:40:58 -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=u4l8cjsvu42HJWMjdr+D0o1z8FHGdy0JFVWWay6MuZc=; b=fA6Ldj0fRbihCMGoM0q0xXB289SGF5SM8bArQ3f4jGzzdElpInPU6PeBTR2mPucU6K 7Bm/Vp2Qulo4+MlNo8w55aA9oE7AZ+YCP/20OGndl4rKpwHHKmbScyt7Rpv/cuzGjw5h 35bJM823hiHU4z8XV1Sp0uJLEIj0DDfOi3AJG1WwZ4LgokXqZcj+A+SS06KVn0Pm9yGa C+ZHtvhN84qXSsZHl04t2itqSHr5iZGj1rQdfF5ngv4+ITimv/uEhtwB2S5hx9Hz0eZR PVSBPyAj1b5ZFSgW842WQK+Mh3sBxmMUQluqXVllgCQjJEeZF8XfN0UrI1pAMw3tR0Js re2A==
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=u4l8cjsvu42HJWMjdr+D0o1z8FHGdy0JFVWWay6MuZc=; b=G9whIqxd/15ihrXsIOs7vCzezT8Sk9VtmxUvRvb9Wznz1Ymok8YuMqF0wj+z2hl8N1 Cm444S60OudFrAuslhnIAiKivFOc/glTsmTOeqXALBwHI2FBY4BYyN265oEwqQaMWnft 4VOYfqg1HtWiCaKo0PZLl6kOOVBawhu7F6s3RxR5VWnCATGaUsYqe9/x+rblsuOV/ucv ngzMTjQJsud3Odfx8zwC1kJRLe/KAdHESzh8a0uGkJtbp/POYxZF+VAh58sJCeiqZADJ Ui+uVrI0QzYsUPWLqHMQ7p4fzEvyS80EjksUGaYZRUcur3ht3FmAgPVXxSCiurIQMxVK S95A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530hUHwhkR12GzQ/ClxETbBrSS3+TH6iaCryz8AbJGV+vRxrJpUd MAueBK7VFxckOyCgbLZogoa02z6IdEvbRTSpFhKZVQkY96A=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxes40mqZQnf95XX6L8+nmdicWSRNOT5v6H0w0lQrnuUgM9K5EWij7AU/UnYZxjfdHk65OM4/UfVGg2CauUbUI=
X-Received: by 2002:ac2:5d42:: with SMTP id w2mr17227792lfd.308.1628502055246; Mon, 09 Aug 2021 02:40:55 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <db8c1a5534e9412ebcfa37682d75f862@huawei.com> <C23D7023-B5B7-47C6-8AC5-65A98822A724@lurchi.franken.de> <CANMZLAZGawUjRhSSE_rA8AyqMx=mx1WFeJ_tZq0KVEXJd2XBfQ@mail.gmail.com> <20210807014730.GA28901@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <CAO42Z2yezZh5-B0PwCuNt2FUMAW-FjMK8QZ8uL4TsPhs26zziw@mail.gmail.com> <20210807151716.GA3098@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <CALZ3u+a_7XQ+R8mV+9KzwRwxa0riP-QD_2R69ycV0NL9jy_S3Q@mail.gmail.com> <20210807175410.GA63079@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <CALx6S36b33LD_hNFvptOJuny4g98=dhq3RtKsGeLx3ks-yYjFg@mail.gmail.com> <6F63D7FE-8768-4BD8-846E-61E50E44228F@lurchi.franken.de> <CALx6S36pbw2angEmDpu5DnX2nix9KgxFs7ExU17x+JXQFs23TA@mail.gmail.com> <CALZ3u+Yt2X3faSVW7K0eaxmaQy6iA6p4=f0c4E_F4CP0tfjHYw@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S343sL0=5wUTRSXMnhSamjTTZU=DzA9Y+dbJ4NRTu0_83w@mail.gmail.com> <CALZ3u+ad6Cecp4T+wfuKVJ4ZmnQvaCSX2njFPCN8DuctrU6uew@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S37u=y1wX8+6d8aX-6=N1MFEqO9RwxQN5zhZnS4DLM8DcA@mail.gmail.com> <CALZ3u+bHbsdzQsHOHx-6nEe6yQBbHMDhH9_PWB=WHTchB8tj5w@mail.gmail.com> <CAN-Dau3+e=g-ujo30hKidXfbD0EJZ8-Y8iz7pu+ez3Yakmgzvw@mail.gmail.com> <CALZ3u+Yg89v2NgvTBRQtzJ0Yfyh8G3gio6H9DN7MG5dZV7MTJw@mail.gmail.com> <aea499df6fce4a939e4803a7dd3cc3fe@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <aea499df6fce4a939e4803a7dd3cc3fe@huawei.com>
From: Brian Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2021 21:40:43 +1200
Message-ID: <CANMZLAYhS9=V4Vh1o5rBQYfKtUzLk16wC=k8Ai-jGhrRFXwOkg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: IPv6 Anycast has been killed by LINUX patch in 2016 - who cares?
To: Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com>
Cc: Töma Gavrichenkov <ximaera@gmail.com>, David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu>, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000084df2805c91d2ec4"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/bKMbIANT-FLKvrVq7ZX8sj7HCgg>
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: Mon, 09 Aug 2021 09:41:05 -0000

RFC7094 is not a standard. Also, RFC6437 does not actually REQUIRE a single
flow label per transport session.
IMHO this is an area where experience with running code is more important
than words in RFCs.

Regards,
    Brian Carpenter
    (via tiny screen & keyboard)

On Mon, 9 Aug 2021, 20:18 Vasilenko Eduard, <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com>
wrote:

> Ø  I, too, believe the practical discussion rather belongs to LKML.
>
> No. RFC 7094 permitted Linux people to do what they did.
>
> They are fully compliant with this standard RFC.
>
> They are not compliant with RFC 6437 but it is not their problem to sync
> RFCs.
>
>
>
> *From:* ietf [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Töma
> Gavrichenkov
> *Sent:* Sunday, August 8, 2021 10:28 PM
> *To:* David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu>
> *Cc:* Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>; 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>; IETF
> discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
> *Subject:* Re: IPv6 Anycast has been killed by LINUX patch in 2016 - who
> cares?
>
>
>
> Peace,
>
> On Sun, Aug 8, 2021, 10:03 PM David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu> wrote:
>
> While I agree with you, anycast is an important capability in the Internet
> architecture
>
>
>
> This is sort of an achievement already given some reckless claims on the
> IETF mailing list!  Thank you.
>
>
>
>
>
> nevertheless it has many limitations, and is not the panacea you claim it
> to be, even for DDoS.
>
>
>
> If you consider the client-server model, it *is* the panacea,
> fundamentally, but I agree that p2p and other models of communications
> might require something else.  My bad, didn't consider these before.
>
>
>
>
>
> Furthermore, I’m not sure what you or the original reporter of this
> problem expect the IETF to do to fix the problem that was reported.
>
>
>
> Honestly, I've just been answering the questions other people have, sharing
> my experience.
>
>
>
> I, too, believe the practical discussion rather belongs to LKML.
>
>
>
> --
>
> Töma
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email