IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> Fri, 06 September 2019 22:23 UTC

Return-Path: <sander@steffann.nl>
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 DD2AD120E0B; Fri, 6 Sep 2019 15:23:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=steffann.nl
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 YXyUbGz9stlC; Fri, 6 Sep 2019 15:23:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sintact.nl (mail.sintact.nl [IPv6:2001:9e0:803::6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97F26120DFA; Fri, 6 Sep 2019 15:23:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 671774B; Sat, 7 Sep 2019 00:23:50 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=steffann.nl; h= references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:date:date :in-reply-to:x-mailer:from:from:subject:subject:mime-version :content-type:content-type:received:received; s=mail; t= 1567808628; bh=VybTpo7/QjwSWgWxhIbsIRFULKfLOlhpU6RnKLVXBzQ=; b=n r5vUOfCG27YQ//SuzrCfgy1rV/ds2ATALQ7bnec4AZ6FO7nkcOL/g08tnQoxr71I P1QM/nnXBeCyngc3KcQ89jAXjo3WvzSIeeM/2rNFrZhFIPXdhn2DYbC/0GvfPoc8 Bmt0fHmxjUPJri16C0T0KWy/ZidnvKaNPdMPv4ioSc=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.sintact.nl
Received: from mail.sintact.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.sintact.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id xUOPh7lYO7EJ; Sat, 7 Sep 2019 00:23:48 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [IPv6:2a02:a213:a300:ce80:30d9:a3ba:cef:60ff] (unknown [IPv6:2a02:a213:a300:ce80:30d9:a3ba:cef:60ff]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4798C3C; Sat, 7 Sep 2019 00:23:48 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
From: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (16G77)
In-Reply-To: <CAOj+MMEkAh4_V7h5H0EdF9jG793fikx1zr-JTzp1pUdvHTeaew@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 07 Sep 2019 00:23:47 +0200
Cc: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <25C52EC3-E271-46FF-90FB-976AE6022098@steffann.nl>
References: <4053BBF5-4678-4E13-88E6-553627E4D32A@steffann.nl> <F92186CF-B93A-44F9-83B5-272963A9B9FD@employees.org> <EDB1ACFD-3924-4599-B95D-D1FC6FF2425A@steffann.nl> <CAOj+MMEkAh4_V7h5H0EdF9jG793fikx1zr-JTzp1pUdvHTeaew@mail.gmail.com>
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/_p8V2udbYs9dGdhJjJuL8-siHtE>
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: Fri, 06 Sep 2019 22:23:53 -0000

Hi Robert,

> All SRv6 existing specs can progress just fine with that last mode of insertion being removed if rough consensus in 6man would not get reached. 

My problem is that Fernando is being told to defend the existing RFC. That is wrong. It is up to the SRv6 proposers to argue and defend the changes they want.

Consensus has to be reached to make a change, not to keep the current consensus.

Cheers,
Sander

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email