Re: [Sidrops] [routing-wg] misconceptions about ROV

Jeroen Massar <jeroen@massar.ch> Thu, 24 February 2022 10:51 UTC

Return-Path: <jeroen@massar.ch>
X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45CD43A1168 for <sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 02:51:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=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=massar.ch
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 8JNbGukQiaFk for <sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 02:50:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from citadel.ch.unfix.org (citadel.ch.unfix.org [IPv6:2001:1620:20b0::50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE2BE3A1142 for <sidrops@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 02:50:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2a10:fc42:a:1042:ca2a:14ff:fe1f:2b7b] (unknown [IPv6:2a10:fc42:a:1042:ca2a:14ff:fe1f:2b7b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-ECDSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jeroen@massar.ch) by citadel.ch.unfix.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 070B722B056B8; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 10:50:53 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=massar.ch; s=DKIM2009; t=1645699853; bh=NHKG12rYOTlS1HsdQj2sJ3BMrfitofSkUAbygt82Ldk=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=hYWEB76FW0Ek/vrlQi/uYi47GovCJfMnGhYqcGIh8LRJiiA4s6Hni+dubUzK6k4Re SwPNSq4P6KHGp0s5VFXcC1EZ+Y4IiiS2raXJQG9+zJjcS/rvZfnT+wazMs/flX3E3S VHgmE3rFNQg6H+u227lIRcB8YlvKiqoXGu/1+Zaa85D5saYYfZ71Gt26VYKlBwxDAZ PU2b7GV93+P+ks6l+5jWolT1HVA6hXVLEyCLnq18OLDA/0eTcWUMdb4C2gqtljWvI5 4nMa/GK6pFXPmD+OA3y6tsNtE2OAH86/JPrIHpjHqYPzE1RTaAyX3MALpEts+RudDJ KE1mmolAbfngQ==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.7\))
From: Jeroen Massar <jeroen@massar.ch>
In-Reply-To: <60B6D863-047D-40A6-80DD-95C05391A0BA@nlnetlabs.nl>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2022 11:50:52 +0100
Cc: sidrops@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <1F43D9E5-CBD9-40C7-ABD2-7C9A20CBD32A@massar.ch>
References: <015C9C28-4230-40D8-A9F2-7420B726C00F@juicybun.cn> <DF148DA2-C94D-42BF-A37F-668D9B37860B@nlnetlabs.nl> <YhS/WR3czIP3jNLF@snel> <ABE3FA29-6C9D-492B-A72A-68C20176E76D@nlnetlabs.nl> <949277FD-27AF-40E8-B557-AA58C62BFEA7@apnic.net> <E16290C1-77ED-4CB1-8712-F6163304ED45@nlnetlabs.nl> <m2k0dmmntj.wl-randy@psg.com> <6D314C7A-8CEC-4B9B-8F80-6B1AC48037E2@nlnetlabs.nl> <85D947F4-E2A4-4FFE-86AF-2D129C49FB9C@psg.com> <8413F0CA-F50A-42B7-B0DA-19A0A90ABE6F@nlnetlabs.nl> <YhdCYjS+yDVsFgNF@snel> <60B6D863-047D-40A6-80DD-95C05391A0BA@nlnetlabs.nl>
To: Tim Bruijnzeels <tim@nlnetlabs.nl>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.7)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidrops/GEGylxQ2YGsIv6kVFq8J75ukl74>
Subject: Re: [Sidrops] [routing-wg] misconceptions about ROV
X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG <sidrops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sidrops>, <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sidrops/>
List-Post: <mailto:sidrops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops>, <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2022 10:51:17 -0000

This will be very off-topic, but is likely also founded into a misconception:


> On 20220224, at 10:16, Tim Bruijnzeels <tim@nlnetlabs.nl> wrote:

[..]

> I was trying to have a discussion about a possible way to help
> operational future deployment. [...]
> 
> I know - it's naive to think that that would be what the IETF
> is for. Fine. I will stop here. Discussion once again seems
> entirely pointless.

Do you want to have a discussion, or do you want to just tell people to stop discussing because you are disagreeing with the arguments they are providing?

> 
> [..] was kind enough to answer.

Are you implying that other people are being unkind?

Calling people naive, is not being very kind in my book...

Greets,
 Jeroen


   (who is not technically capable of adding anything to the technical discussion because I have not read up properly;
    hence letting the people talk who did read up and have broad experience in running actual infrastructure --- running code et al --
    but I hate seeing such comments in a thread.... and actually, we should not focus on those and just likely ignore those kind
    of comments completely, but ... hard

    please gentlemen and other ladies, keep things civil and technical instead of attacking eachother between lines,
    it does not cause a worthy environment to contribute to.

    Please have a good chill, reconsider why people contribute to the IETF, write code and contribute, then come back with arguments.

    I will be adding technical comments when I have actually fully read up, likely coded a few things and deployed things though
    but that requires time that is not available at the moment... I will be back, and am reading along.