Re: One size fits all !?! (was: Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people come from?)

John Scudder <jgs@juniper.net> Mon, 01 June 2020 17:43 UTC

Return-Path: <jgs@juniper.net>
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 770A73A13C1 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 10:43:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, PLING_QUERY=0.1, 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=juniper.net header.b=03PwbcRZ; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=juniper.net header.b=VoCDP46T
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 AJNzQ0GstLD2 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 10:43:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com [67.231.152.164]) (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 1DA9C3A13A1 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 10:43:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0108161.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 051HhXcN000440; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 10:43:35 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=PPS1017; bh=CnXAy9OH8GEiTaMuz7cgn4WO/KAxYyQK43vY2Stkwxk=; b=03PwbcRZKhGxUIkBzaDpZf2xB4WP31CfILJ4n/UpzdTGYnPQBo33TTfRx8jBDsK7lnUU yS0DADILK0JSSfJVNZz5FLBJWQXyFT7bkkptj1kUcbzKWZEvZE34t03igcweYR7Xxtd5 P7bE+WrFzREb1uRntZZa5ApnkKtNcragRL6vXKCp3v5/JlQ4Z/gVotPRKjPBr6wDeN8r u6TACssyCao7g89fvKfIDetNXE2Zaasr5E94mnK9I1W88TMi16HC2IHhzGN1OuAjOXl5 x7FAJDx3ncCWqY+1MzyPrjyOCyWzLSt3gVFwEUqgs8IbZYM3XFkL37Yg42toYzPkiMJW Sw==
Received: from nam11-dm6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-dm6nam11lp2171.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.57.171]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 31bpkxu0yw-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 01 Jun 2020 10:43:35 -0700
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=OGZBCkDw79i2uVWVcJUU1XhVps9S76/BiKZpQs2vfBN3oFxhQx+pwvYy7oNe+5BhKj6giSUPH7hRid1Q5yRt3U1+vNQVpZ5WDiSFdVp8tHaP8Nlv+hDoG9usthcaDlHQ3425cj7Zt2T1pSALXh65MmdAnykxhZIXsPKPDdYkAROZN9Ocmlacy2YlRRp5yErF56plNba0lDqXXXQ5zXi1xLzklTuhg6POnOZWyFESuJzSsm67a4z7dh8yQnhosaKS8SF1DnUmvwEV60QjOLQamdJzOjzcE3nnnpBP0S4Kp0kVTFzZVb0oE1fl6hiM4Ve59RD7r6CGSpcCe72a+qUNKw==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=CnXAy9OH8GEiTaMuz7cgn4WO/KAxYyQK43vY2Stkwxk=; b=mcMYKBTvQWcVBjGc/ACdKGu56WihQ/Wzu5qptcB2S7c9ufvjatxYPcMmFNntIC2GN5WFNN0DCsm90p/Cjrbc9VS9mxws6kgZnXXE26wlxQBgNxFg8na8EB3MG8HyrztwCmSalKyGSdljOH6In5hXrkI95GiqZbHiIbAwi280aLKiJcmwTKX7kKR3cQPecElA/SnF0KfDIahgjHq+D2tTBm3qEDnCaddrxbCoJOp1WL1KEi7JGZjyCYEJbaK+ezM2jl5tILgby0vo+76yI6HOI54q2n0Y76GT/7VsE38w/551k4n4HwwigsmKE7iaEiaQgSOanCRTriD6e55BZeDi/A==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=juniper.net; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=juniper.net; dkim=pass header.d=juniper.net; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=CnXAy9OH8GEiTaMuz7cgn4WO/KAxYyQK43vY2Stkwxk=; b=VoCDP46TsKigk0ByevG9QdxFX0qYMA7v4lDWlSCrBllABqlM1rZ195KKwurcEr3Qwc4A99WMuBdDc/Qgslfd5lVF1KCjLS8I945mR7KaT8V3ov9frx29E9irjjtKOjq1qVPvLEudlgyv78Y6YEzcgDgNn0BaES3Uxi0KdGF8h8M=
Received: from BL0PR05MB5076.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:83::12) by BL0PR05MB5220.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:8a::22) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3066.12; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 17:43:33 +0000
Received: from BL0PR05MB5076.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::499e:c613:2d2:b09f]) by BL0PR05MB5076.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::499e:c613:2d2:b09f%7]) with mapi id 15.20.3045.024; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 17:43:33 +0000
From: John Scudder <jgs@juniper.net>
To: "Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
CC: Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-6@u-1.phicoh.com>, "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: One size fits all !?! (was: Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people come from?)
Thread-Topic: One size fits all !?! (was: Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people come from?)
Thread-Index: AQHWNdxn8lxeM/yfXEebkSH/FnKLRKjD/PU1gAAPCgCAAACcgA==
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2020 17:43:33 +0000
Message-ID: <EC7323D4-BCEE-4240-B6EC-5304668AD1EA@juniper.net>
References: <CAO42Z2xDygUXTGwVunGSTMkZGMF8VePrPaXLSAJg14vAJdca5A@mail.gmail.com> <6DB604C0-2C29-44A8-AB01-DA697552C7DA@employees.org> <1C1F0496-33A8-4646-B356-369EA9ABAD33@gmail.com> <DM6PR05MB6348501B266FF51DD805C25DAE8F0@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <70CDD965-C9B4-4A15-9ACA-FFE685D97129@gmail.com> <7AC15DBA-17DD-4CF7-95C1-0F1C6775BF30@fugue.com> <20200529171234.GY62020@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <m1jfnYY-0000IJC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <370ce45962cf4890b15851663f55291d@boeing.com>
In-Reply-To: <370ce45962cf4890b15851663f55291d@boeing.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2)
authentication-results: boeing.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;boeing.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=juniper.net;
x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.13]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: fd30e03b-93ef-4ee5-8e1c-08d806534e21
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BL0PR05MB5220:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BL0PR05MB5220033A8896AD545121B486AA8A0@BL0PR05MB5220.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 0421BF7135
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: lnjhLRdML8zjaDmcSvpAhq6zMpHUVO64hU5eKg0jtZLfcuHP8/jEYY/7NpswXq0CDkNTediLmP3WChJQYFcoccRhm33mj5vKuePtcB0JKbnMzROxwB+ocw5gY9I5Maio2gAxWct2la5lqqKWRwIq5yZc1dlywFnzsRn0g67MrFxaKfc6GHqLV/Ez/cVuj+hbKfs7SsgGlur1O5o/s1rUbpcfWyfejS2TnUJjS4BS8vjV4TlM7laqAsuOUstwW9Hk5/kzSWCSretz6G1ONCyzngnhBcnSCdYNo2kCuAIDQD7ipbwbiL9aOMd+IPMUimhmIoa+DMdQirXs4PUINAka5yqLi2vNuQgrHSdHdNZJnobYtXUoBaauH0bfcu4E/JF3r/ANAS8NPdFcU+3Zr/9MTg==
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:BL0PR05MB5076.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:(4636009)(366004)(396003)(346002)(39860400002)(136003)(376002)(966005)(66574014)(186003)(71200400001)(36756003)(86362001)(53546011)(6506007)(478600001)(2906002)(26005)(5660300002)(316002)(54906003)(66446008)(33656002)(8936002)(8676002)(83380400001)(6916009)(66556008)(6512007)(66476007)(6486002)(2616005)(4743002)(4326008)(64756008)(91956017)(66946007)(76116006); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: d3dZ2WQE8BoPZdYPbxDA8jQX6dmuP8jKP26Q/e7vaMn42Zz1icXohQMwljnSPHBCmBq+Ntxx3FyXFk2OpLaGvgRVkEGwhv2Wy7pXNaTWNAETYZC3kVovJqg5vcCFnqcPkawANQU+1nVNdpFKTplMe2Cr5+FWw+/1KTh6xZtVNdz8DuFoFUjqE2ljtlw3uNpMbI0bAQvbUFUuBlXKrwVXdfNsq21otITk5DSz1/C1r94PKY/qyQ3/7i6p8I/Q02r0lZJ/eOBDn3ioNk4g/V/Nmpio7HkTwDU9grQUL1+Vtv6xGHrlSEgzzBghzAFkvhQVv0FG+He+El3a97VeLfu+v3plB+EuFyo3h0dIdhDXIvsHTQsEIt7/kVYvMbuhNVAtqkqAw8RrDqMwzlhX3QXsZ89193S+/8U/apj6ZIlonX0G+ZB3T5dwiee87NFIvfsItHolS0DrgryS1nVwDWPHyk9yuKNymDnBXxgN9O7LJUo=
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <40063899FA77754ABF54FF9772A59EA6@namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: fd30e03b-93ef-4ee5-8e1c-08d806534e21
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 01 Jun 2020 17:43:33.4829 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: GS35URpscjgFSpsB0ehCTcwByVQVRDvWtubf4ct+6bzr7xaTlu2wpTNNIyhFXiJU
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BL0PR05MB5220
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.216, 18.0.687 definitions=2020-06-01_12:2020-06-01, 2020-06-01 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 clxscore=1011 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 mlxscore=0 cotscore=-2147483648 adultscore=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 malwarescore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2004280000 definitions=main-2006010132
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/kP5rDLDFtR96-dMMvWLpuwtXRUU>
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, 01 Jun 2020 17:43:47 -0000

Isn’t that a good application for link-level header compression, as Philip alludes to being used on good ol’ SLIP and PPP?

Regards,

—John

> On Jun 1, 2020, at 1:41 PM, Templin (US), Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> wrote:
> 
> [External Email. Be cautious of content]
> 
> 
> Philip, good message but I do see an element of truth in what the original poster
> was trying to communicate. In aviation, we often deal with wireless links with
> bandwidth less than 1Mbps - sometimes even *much* less. Asking those links
> to carry at least two IPv6 addresses per packet is a considerable commitment
> of resources, but that is our current plan. Should we be open to considering
> alternatives?
> 
> Thanks - Fred
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ipv6 [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Philip Homburg
>> Sent: Monday, June 01, 2020 9:45 AM
>> To: ipv6@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: One size fits all !?! (was: Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people come from?)
>> 
>> In your letter dated Fri, 29 May 2020 19:12:34 +0200 you wrote:
>>> IMHO, it is a misguided dogma to think that RFC8200 128 bit
>>> addresses IPv6 is a one-size-fits-all solution not only for
>>> what it was built for, the Internet, but also all arbitrary controlled
>>> networks - for the infinite future!
>> 
>> For IPv4, one-size-fits-all was a good thing. Anybody who remembers
>> the nightmare of many different network protocols, all slightly different
>> knows how great it was to have just one protocol.
>> 
>> Even in the early days, one-size-fits-all was a bit of a problem. I remember
>> SLIP and PPP header compression trying do deal with big headers on slow links.
>> 
>> Right now we have IPv6, which can address all devices in the world. Which is
>> great for software, no need to worry where something is, just generate an
>> IPv6 packet and it will get there somehow.
>> 
>> If we look at the overhead of IPv6 then certainly at speed of 100 Mbps and
>> higher, the effect of bigger addresses is left in the noise.
>> 
>> Obviously, IPv6 on slow links in a limited domain is not a great fit. Does
>> that mean that IPv6 has to change? What is the benefit for all those devices
>> that are on fast links and have no problem?
>> 
>>> IoT with IPv6 is an extreme pain (header compression, MTU).
>>> Most controlled networks do not even want global addresses (security,
>>> segment based app-gateway architectures, ...).
>> 
>> My first question would be, why not use IPv4 if address size and MTU are
>> a problem? IPv4 is certainly a mature technology.
>> 
>>> 16-bit/32-bit/48-bit address sizes would be highly desirable.
>>> Even the 1980'th CLNP network protocol had variable sized addresses.
>> 
>> Nobody who does low level software wants veriable size anything.
>> 
>> If I compare processing an IPv4 header (which is variable size) with an IPv6
>> header, then dealing with an IPv6 header is so much easier. With variable
>> length addresses that would only get worse.
>> 
>>> IPv6 has not solved core problems to be even equal to L2 switching:
>>> plug routers together, get automatic connectivity, no bother about addresses.
>>> CLNP was a lot closer to that goal too.
>> 
>> Both DHCPv6 PD and homenet deal with this problem.
>> 
>>> but think really about another
>>> instance of IPv6-NG, but this time backward compatible.
>> 
>> I doubt that the world is waiting for a third protocol that brings a
>> completely new set of issues.
>> 
>> And I have no clue what a backward compatible internet protocol is supposed
>> to look like. People have complained for years that IPv6 is not backward
>> compatible with IPv4, but in all that time I have never seen a sensible
>> protocol that is actually backward compatible with IPv4.
>> 
>>> If we continue to proliferate this "one-size-fits-all" myth,
>>> then we are just continuing to extend our own version of
>>> a winchester mystery house and kill our industry.
>> 
>> I doubt that the IETF has any power to stop a new local networking protocol.
>> 
>> If, for example, IoT needs a light weight local networking protocol, then
>> anybody can just design it. It may help adoption if there is an easy way
>> to convert to and from IPv6, but such a protocol can easily exist outside
>> the internet world.
>> 
>> 
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>> ipv6@ietf.org
>> Administrative Requests: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UJAdvTzn_Z3n89OKnyACbWXrj22QQm2ZQ2bl3eO4TithKf6Zoo08UEqtwY0FLw$
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UJAdvTzn_Z3n89OKnyACbWXrj22QQm2ZQ2bl3eO4TithKf6Zoo08UEqtwY0FLw$
> --------------------------------------------------------------------