Re: [spring] Spirit and Letter of the Law (was: Question about SRv6 Insert function)

Enno Rey <erey@ernw.de> Thu, 05 September 2019 14:21 UTC

Return-Path: <erey@ernw.de>
X-Original-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03ED61200DB; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 07:21:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 v2v6o7PhgBYL; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 07:21:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.ernw.net (mx1.ernw.net [62.159.96.78]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BDC891200CD; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 07:21:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail1.ernw.net (unknown [IPv6:fd00:2001:0:d001::30]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mail1.ernw.net", Issuer "ernw ca1" (verified OK)) by mx1.ernw.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D2DDC27383; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 16:21:08 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ws26.ernw.net (ws26.ernw.net [172.31.1.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "ws26.ernw.net", Issuer "ernw ca1" (verified OK)) by mail1.ernw.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A79276785CA; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 16:21:08 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by ws26.ernw.net (Postfix, from userid 1002) id 419BC63900; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 16:21:08 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2019 16:21:08 +0200
From: Enno Rey <erey@ernw.de>
To: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
Cc: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>, "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>, Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com>, draft-voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion <draft-voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion@ietf.org>, Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>, draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming <draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20190905142108.GB82455@ernw.de>
References: <BYAPR05MB54637FEAE1518F83977D274FAEB80@BYAPR05MB5463.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <538732E2-915B-4952-A439-F4678FCC21B2@employees.org> <4c6b2456-db05-0771-5b98-bfd9f07b220b@si6networks.com> <34AB9F0F-614B-45C2-BD84-7DD53A1D5188@employees.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <34AB9F0F-614B-45C2-BD84-7DD53A1D5188@employees.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/Hnl8NkidtqkDFBeMLGPrnuwBydY>
Subject: Re: [spring] Spirit and Letter of the Law (was: Question about SRv6 Insert function)
X-BeenThere: spring@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Source Packet Routing in NetworkinG \(SPRING\)" <spring.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spring/>
List-Post: <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:21:13 -0000

Hi Ole,

On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 03:05:14PM +0200, Ole Troan wrote:
> Fernando,
> 
> >> The IETF is not writing de jure standards.
> >> In fact reality is quite different, and the Internet evolves the way it does somewhat independently of what documents the IETF produces.

one may then wonder: why does the IETF produce documents "for the Internet"? [A: maybe in some cases they don't, but for the interests of vendors being involved]

I've been in the IPv6 world for a while now, mostly with some distance to what's happening in the IETF. From that experience I can confirm that the [IPv6] Internet evolves "independently of what documents the IETF [here: 6man] produces". Let me still state that from such an outsider's perspective the whole debate around EH insertion for segment routing looks so blatantly obviously vendor-driven that 6man has completely lost its credibility in many circles being involved in deploying IPv6 in "the Internet". I know you folks don't rly care but mentioning 6man usually produces rolling eyes and quirky smiles. 
I understand that this e-mail does not argue on the grounds of technical merit, and it actually wastes more bandwidth, neutrons and life time of smart people reading this, in a debate which has already wasted *a lot* of those. May I hence ask for a response in a direct manner if you ever feel inclined to write one. thanks. 

Everybody have a great day

Enno

--
Enno Rey