Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Popping)
Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> Sat, 07 December 2019 16:17 UTC
Return-Path: <tom@herbertland.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 8316B1207FF for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 Dec 2019 08:17:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 8oF7C0gr1mUk for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 Dec 2019 08:17:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ed1-x531.google.com (mail-ed1-x531.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::531]) (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 CC0D41202A0 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 7 Dec 2019 08:17:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ed1-x531.google.com with SMTP id f8so8648812edv.2 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 07 Dec 2019 08:17:13 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=hh+3RT1Na9OeWyTNU/zdncEgxsFJOHdTUJ5bABJ7lcE=; b=HICKGrAWM1rc+Beu/rGpo5vEc/OrYRdTF766EZ92eI8l5DjAmJD3iLmcnwPxyQi0Qk SNdUCuePsbnt11Q98+UbToU9E+5QVjEmZVq/7l1dQaBUWgpg5/wd2fGPp3N9l+2RzhEm YWvZu+5uqDDGBgrxZmx7cjcaO0M9//ZIWcvRlK1S3e+dMUSLLXlnFFzp+6pdq2vnZZ9x H0H8CaDFjMG/YLCmj5G7/H3WooliHd3mNfwtO47wNUmmGOHU+EW5CcGWHsss/3rGxade KJbiLW3FWGgUk9OfQ7ynrt9eIkZsLLzvOVA55pX2OTlQ0E07weN+i6K/yTOTQybfWI9A rjMA==
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=hh+3RT1Na9OeWyTNU/zdncEgxsFJOHdTUJ5bABJ7lcE=; b=e6vPDhsAz3Wh8SIbczPzmG+FYDpe/NIoRAQVjFr8/Xl4x3V3GOoV+5vIMJlOGNicql onvOFyRYjP+5C/tf0sI15yxL/HbCtpHIAiHRgtBXwAbp45kyRSzgM2Xf6SV/Gkd5u52r yZoTbaq4KrMIC2fwAcKVOJyMeHYpdlrZ+t/01TfS4ZEu5Y7DmSzJp5mu+NhfOYDYFY4y YmB5LCyCtOrIbT/EAGJAn5WuEfwvwdVTjN+K0dJ7E+elszAmxLP+jNdBSAkBhL/6C+13 OXOw5ujFCGSe95FqJXO90MsuOtzzSW7AKCheoc12i2RyyDVLegvuNDgyvqTX8WmCjP+Y V3cQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXavypbtb751qklpLxie5pfI/yo/Clw8IeIJE4DLRk/qAL71sqn gEuhKTzID/O9VjnRPVpb6kqrhDM7k4FolINW+WT/oIbU
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyVsdj0/TIc5zV/NPOb1bhoJpBr+ohS5kJM6qq4HNuC326U6qFhgQUWJ3ufhsrMuWtha/CoI9v2sDOv7NbbOM4=
X-Received: by 2002:aa7:da18:: with SMTP id r24mr22785233eds.111.1575735432152; Sat, 07 Dec 2019 08:17:12 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CALx6S3588ja9AZzBQ0dqwx0j-ki6A5tusye+odQKPyAyF+hEww@mail.gmail.com> <10E890EA-3278-44EE-881E-EBC91D419587@employees.org> <23751bbf-a1cb-9480-3415-ec7ddd67d37f@si6networks.com> <2D4B43CC-EE52-4CD7-B8FE-E79B90EDEE7A@employees.org> <47e9fc60-38a2-e1eb-cc44-ee1e011d72fa@si6networks.com>
In-Reply-To: <47e9fc60-38a2-e1eb-cc44-ee1e011d72fa@si6networks.com>
From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2019 08:17:00 -0800
Message-ID: <CALx6S36DyU8wraxmFh3vLOTVgCCMztSGW7Uh3MUYZNJ1EY0eCw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Popping)
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Cc: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/mFMkpyemDR10sanBhLP05uWvAKI>
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: Sat, 07 Dec 2019 16:17:15 -0000
On Sat, Dec 7, 2019 at 7:17 AM Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> wrote: > > On 7/12/19 08:39, otroan@employees.org wrote: > > Fernando, > > > >> Is it really a serious way to try to achieve consensus to routinely fail > >> to answer the questions that wg participants ask .. which one might > >> argue that should have already been in version -00 of the document? > > > > If it is not something I would consider productive use of the working groups > > time, nor mine, I refrain to answer questions that have both been asked > > and answered before. I am not aware of any unanswered questions. > > PLease let me clarify: > This document has been around for about two years. It doesn't contain a > motivation, not even a reference to RFC8200, and a note why they need to > do this, and what something else doesn't work for them. > > I asked that question numerous times. Do you really think that, two > years later, I should be directed to a video to find the answer, instead > of the authors inclusing the motivation in the draft? > I agree. The questions of motivation and necessity for the protocol have been raised many times both on the list as well in the f2f now. These are fundamental questions that should be asked of all protocols. Asking the WG participants to watch videos and then referring them to yet another draft to answer their questions is frustrating. Tom > The draft had 18 authors at some time... I don't think I'm asking much. > > Thanks, > -- > Fernando Gont > SI6 Networks > e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com > PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492 > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > ipv6@ietf.org > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > --------------------------------------------------------------------
- Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Popping Ron Bonica
- Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Fernando Gont
- Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- RE: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Ron Bonica
- Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Fernando Gont
- Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… otroan
- RE: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Ron Bonica
- Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… otroan
- Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Fernando Gont
- We don't seem to be following our processes (Re: … Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… otroan
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… otroan
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Tom Herbert
- RE: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Ron Bonica
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Enno Rey
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Enno Rey
- RE: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Ron Bonica
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Bob Hinden
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… otroan
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Sander Steffann
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Tom Herbert
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Sander Steffann
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Robert Raszuk
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Bob Hinden
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… otroan
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Tom Herbert
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… otroan
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Andrew Alston
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… otroan
- RE: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Ron Bonica
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Andrew Alston
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… otroan
- RE: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Ron Bonica
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Fernando Gont
- Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- RE: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Ron Bonica
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Ole Troan
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Andrew Alston
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Sander Steffann
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Tom Herbert
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… otroan
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… otroan
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Tom Herbert
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Ole Troan
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Separating issues (was Re: [spring] We don't seem… Suresh Krishnan
- RE: Separating issues (was Re: [spring] We don't … Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… otroan
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Mark Smith
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… otroan
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… otroan
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Fernando Gont
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Robert Raszuk
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Tom Herbert
- Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Tom Herbert
- Re: [spring] Network Programming - Penultimate Se… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Fernando Gont
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Fernando Gont
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Mark Smith
- IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Fernando Gont
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Sander Steffann
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Gyan Mishra
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Joel M. Halpern
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Gyan Mishra
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Tom Herbert
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain jmh.direct@joelhalpern.com
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Gyan Mishra
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Gyan Mishra
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Sander Steffann
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Warren Kumari
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Gyan Mishra
- RE: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Ron Bonica
- RE: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Ron Bonica
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Sander Steffann
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Gyan Mishra
- RE: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Ron Bonica
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- RE: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… bruno.decraene
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Fernando Gont
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Tom Herbert
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Gyan Mishra
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Fernando Gont
- RE: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Ron Bonica
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Gyan Mishra
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Fernando Gont
- Re: topics to circulate Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: topics to circulate Gyan Mishra
- Re: topics to circulate Erik Kline
- Re: topics to circulate Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: topics to circulate Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Alexandre Petrescu