IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [spring] RFC8200 update?

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Mon, 02 March 2020 04:21 UTC

Return-Path: <fgont@si6networks.com>
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 44FE13A0AD7; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 20:21:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 NRwRKFzmOvkt; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 20:21:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fgont.go6lab.si (fgont.go6lab.si [91.239.96.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09A623A0AD5; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 20:21:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.10] (unknown [181.45.84.85]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by fgont.go6lab.si (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E33CF832A9; Mon, 2 Mar 2020 05:21:48 +0100 (CET)
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>, Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>
Cc: James Guichard <james.n.guichard@futurewei.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, SPRING WG List <spring@ietf.org>
References: <D20C2322-8420-416A-90C4-6A2401825FBD@steffann.nl> <DBBPR03MB5415E186A3F30AB1E62EC5E3EEE80@DBBPR03MB5415.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com> <199B7645-A2AC-4E1A-9E6E-7638A200BE80@steffann.nl> <c1e8bc28880d4ee3a631ac9b9c6799d3@nokia-sbell.com> <C5A467D6-F4CB-4EE8-9746-B8E3DE235CB5@steffann.nl> <DM6PR13MB3066B3C8F53A6CDC5D097DE1D2E80@DM6PR13MB3066.namprd13.prod.outlook.com> <CAOj+MMFCWDSnQhBOdfApoowNZi5S-b2CVTP0+fu8-Wj8-+ORag@mail.gmail.com> <CAHw9_iL0as1Ospinatm3kwfQPfKsKWwzn3r8H_KLiqZBgmgcqw@mail.gmail.com> <CAO42Z2z+k37d3z6=c=UrpRX64OC9fmsdCrWiFr-NiZb0GzU3wg@mail.gmail.com> <CAOj+MMF=Gfto7r1+X3efFj-OwKqM6AdP=CsoMvWXzLnLvViiYA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3f2f4f5e-14c1-78d3-5843-59add90c2578@si6networks.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2020 01:07:23 -0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAOj+MMF=Gfto7r1+X3efFj-OwKqM6AdP=CsoMvWXzLnLvViiYA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/WYHhE0VdK0iMED4ylqctY8nAUgA>
Subject: Re: [spring] RFC8200 update?
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: Mon, 02 Mar 2020 04:21:56 -0000

On 29/2/20 07:45, Robert Raszuk wrote:
[...]
> 
> And to be very clear - I am not saying you are wrong. Perhaps you look 
> at train analogy - sure if each passenger would start messing with train 
> car/wagons construction the train would clearly not go far. But if so we 
> just need a new train architecture rather then saying - oh no Mr. SR you 
> can not travel at all.

A number of us have been talling you, for a long time now, that these 
proposals (PSP, TI-LFA) change the architecture.

Rather than admitting they do require a change in the architecture, you 
have tried to pretend they fit in the current architecture.

Rather than focusing your energy in making your case for changing it, 
all these discussions have been wasting everyone's time trying to make 
each of us believe that these behaviors are currently supported by IPv6.

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email