IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mif] Route option for DHCPv6 - next steps?

Erik Kline <ek@google.com> Wed, 04 April 2012 02:07 UTC

Return-Path: <ek@google.com>
X-Original-To: mif@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mif@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F53C21F8541 for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Apr 2012 19:07:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Z8Q3wx9ARnZr for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Apr 2012 19:07:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qc0-f172.google.com (mail-qc0-f172.google.com [209.85.216.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C853121F853A for <mif@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Apr 2012 19:07:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qcsq13 with SMTP id q13so243084qcs.31 for <mif@ietf.org>; Tue, 03 Apr 2012 19:07:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-system-of-record; bh=OA7zDPd8bvtiLh014C2ab/0MxZCpx1c30M/BCQJ8qvA=; b=IUFpKpW90AE76tI36dZm0yCsMMO+8/h1gj1DpJvoJ1N05WKTROlVUcC4J+4ND5Gyvo Ih7bkB6xKQokfx+kaoJpd7M1DY6JqrutQQsBA4g2L79xXvMTpf1omX3hXCgoSdIkijAM Xh4Cf62393n3L6DL+CToS1U0LcakpuXe+gbny8Uc4bwHRckWb01KjLI8lhsritQvfr5D HyZ8gaWNd/fmRhWPql9JtNqKBZGl/B7tnKqHHvE+1SkMqn6RNRoWqyanOAuxjAmltxC3 XX5EbngK/8F/p7t43MRsmQIkZqej+fjRYkZQCtL/axaQVSKFyr8nC7rqVk4vkWzc8lH3 yvYA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-system-of-record:x-gm-message-state; bh=OA7zDPd8bvtiLh014C2ab/0MxZCpx1c30M/BCQJ8qvA=; b=e8t2QsMCfIRH2TYjdolPmkcnKNuyRGF6MCP3+U73e4MxZDyOYvuQuV/nGAAE0tW8Iz sOdJIqTVLHvkiCqWVde14aqThiVI0wTJn928pVX2wvMkZykRpdsm9qOX54YFzbpsaZ6m 6hVztA3eI/Jr9grICWs9Fkc6d/q+Zxb3A/7sQEeVjO+Vp8RT6BkjjzZlOpshQMoE4SAa wBw3jkhKInDlPY8qZpzqUQW1TTy6DPpAeo4AUZenIF4WPgQHAHtIYVM69RXSuwJML+2+ DrwiHpvRdB5exrtjKPmsqhZgK6l9opRKJas0d4mG1evuE+d33xsgMgl6PRczqAbDFBQq wnUQ==
Received: by 10.229.115.21 with SMTP id g21mr5988575qcq.77.1333505227328; Tue, 03 Apr 2012 19:07:07 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.115.21 with SMTP id g21mr5988566qcq.77.1333505227206; Tue, 03 Apr 2012 19:07:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.128.170 with HTTP; Tue, 3 Apr 2012 19:07:07 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <00c301cd10ec$46f39ff0$d4dadfd0$@tndh.net>
References: <75459BC2-E733-45C0-BC1C-25A19BBA1137@gmail.com> <CAE97176.17DF4%wdec@cisco.com> <CANF0JMD_zfXGcfMy+rCOFXS1aCZ3RPHoRtkBeS8kDgOFcfQ8Fg@mail.gmail.com> <75D251D1-9828-4AFE-9BEF-B376E97133C7@nominum.com> <CANF0JMBbhrF0G=hSvcvyZAddAMW7oSO5KpzUmcJXCtwcnmyWOw@mail.gmail.com> <4A221CE5-ECF0-4E07-9329-E6BAA3F06A96@nominum.com> <4EC4AADB.8030803@piuha.net> <DD1241D5-B794-49C3-A3A2-4294248DDD10@gmail.com> <4F719186.3060507@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr3tSoDPcheriWdZEeKyhqpDANCP7Co0wVVqK5+mXc7e5A@mail.gmail.com> <4F72CD22.3080604@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr3RUUthiawKrmxjSNqzEbJcOLpHvDGb9XLtdiU-tfEYyw@mail.gmail.com> <4F744831.3070406@gmail.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307472D4175@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <4F7453FC.3010502@gmail.com> <4F74546D.4060808@gmail.com> <72C42575-6BE2-4F27-B7F4-AA4539DA7EF9@lilacglade.org> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307472D43A1@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <069301cd0dd2$5954df00$0bfe9d00$@tndh.net> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307472D45F6@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307472D5C5B@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <00c301cd10ec$46f39ff0$d4dadfd0$@tndh.net>
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2012 11:07:07 +0900
Message-ID: <CAAedzxqQCJ9he4-=DSdyA2aX4rmyLiYeCyQPuod7diez+G0TqQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Erik Kline <ek@google.com>
To: Tony Hain <alh-ietf@tndh.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-System-Of-Record: true
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkMATrOSTsqm/jk8+vRiGThPYdO/YiH4vqf5R5BFCMwuh7iyGvrlIDjxoRyQgLOomGuCNgAqAEpa3+PD4stp7kAuHsgJ92AS3Z7lj0vS6bSOEExWWcrlexTaG1L6CDVur3B6HhR
Cc: mif@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mif] Route option for DHCPv6 - next steps?
X-BeenThere: mif@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiple Interface Discussion List <mif.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mif>, <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mif>
List-Post: <mailto:mif@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif>, <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2012 02:07:08 -0000

> Widespread deployment requires that people have the tools they want to use
> for managing their local network. Continued fighting in the IETF over why
> someone else's operational model is "wrong" is simply delaying deployment.

In the short time that I've been working on IPv6 I don't think I have
seen this as an actual blocker to deployment.  I've seen it claimed to
be a blocker, though, just as I've seen many other claimed blockers as
well.  When each of those claimed blockers were cleared it didn't
actually result in deployment, just identification of the next blocker
du jour.

For this reason I think I completely agree with Ted's earlier comments
about "just because it's in IPv4" and use cases.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email