IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [spring] Typo correction Re: Question from SPRING regarding draft-filsfilscheng-spring-srv6-srh-compression

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Thu, 14 October 2021 21:06 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.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 358B33A0870; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 14:06:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 ydX6-VAeMfrO; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 14:06:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg1-x529.google.com (mail-pg1-x529.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::529]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B5AE3A0D6F; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 14:06:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg1-x529.google.com with SMTP id m21so6619448pgu.13; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 14:06:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Amy9gc7H0x8HJS+EAptVnzqydNA1Mr7o9Bc5FX2+0yI=; b=fIvvVF4eKIu4ks5pQlJf3fgyJf5nkZCb7f0tI7lRdlWIR7rJH2fRyEi0lnhisMEbjZ CMdMm6y7HTWWmxcw2GSThmpdvj5fYHWY9Xdk6MBFM1zx4ppqm1Kio+FloCsBUlLef5rK ayuP8CNhcWobn27j2drbB689UTbcizmFBroek3DR7py55FRsobtTY4JGGE1q90BcZEtI p3JSsnyFfhRQt2KU0ra1IlYMR8CaZMQ4lKzToOG3+HbcUURvv/PxhD3zBauibx7wc0N0 OZlnNWtaAj1NYJGJvb+080OXNPBfeaqvACYlAT0rX4hKBgAMflM0g5TDZPoFK/jWe5cx CRbw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Amy9gc7H0x8HJS+EAptVnzqydNA1Mr7o9Bc5FX2+0yI=; b=M3902URfAME5oBaDafc0XqseJDengk0nC96WVtwbY+fFXfBGrM4khJzUIz3uYuvcNK BWvZuGqgzhYWKY3dpMLTuo3Btnc5bC9/FdYH6afbAyjgsSuATVCAaQGDuf8ayTV4FFZM 5nZqDx4ZZPN2LG5zy6SIMIYXQvCTwfcPz2nKHKQ6TyfVM4ykZawDxeJ8BPJxYFbvQL6t wEN2mYyAohcLHIKBb1HshFXoEwpne991dgxe1ABPik0g5I4fvEzZM8EsLuM/yzoA3jI7 mmwVKEYJ2+HMmdQpTHEJZcJ41h5oLiSXAjJttKahc9b/Gc5NPqA+2Afb8Qs2dVjyJThR LfMA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532azzucf0U1x+HpIufmSL+JQl1K/MlrUGfxjkp/SsTi4TwBG3MV eN4DtF8rNcYLPZ36rxah+fHXI88TYhw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy33SCI4A/xxOs4VW8XyUUZMip8QCxhr/5e2Y0wIW0u9v9RTwhD8CmI8hD+EIDBZjXdU5RTsw==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:d40b:: with SMTP id a11mr5991756pgh.456.1634245590147; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 14:06:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e003:102d:e801:db7:d041:a2d:ce65? ([2406:e003:102d:e801:db7:d041:a2d:ce65]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p4sm3082672pgc.15.2021.10.14.14.06.27 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 14 Oct 2021 14:06:29 -0700 (PDT)
To: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>, "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>, "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>
References: <85fddbe9-4eb8-7d90-d246-a888fe8bdcd3@joelhalpern.com> <139d72fd-98de-f46a-767f-6a493c4facc9@joelhalpern.com> <1daf3d20-22b2-d111-5131-bd53f51c53a3@gmail.com> <CA+9kkMCk6D-7q-LTu0gwL_ZsyBAaFvn=3_CizK56oHG5dGRwYA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <60f71d8c-8165-111c-4099-7f926a897d22@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2021 10:06:24 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CA+9kkMCk6D-7q-LTu0gwL_ZsyBAaFvn=3_CizK56oHG5dGRwYA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/yabN_b6b47eGsR79utlUeRoPZq0>
Subject: Re: [spring] Typo correction Re: Question from SPRING regarding draft-filsfilscheng-spring-srv6-srh-compression
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, 14 Oct 2021 21:06:36 -0000

On 14-Oct-21 22:41, Ted Hardie wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 9:28 PM Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com <mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>     Including semantics *of any kind* in an IP address is a very fundamental
>     change to the concept of IP.<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>
> 
> 
> Would you mind elaborating what you mean by semantics in the statement above?  Clearly there are semantics in things like the IPv4 multicast and experimental address ranges (aka "Class D" and "Class E"); especially for the multicast case, the very fundamental semantics of the distribution are signalled using the address and there has been significant deployment using those semantics.  Isn't that semantics in the meaning above?

Yes, I should have restricted my remark to *unicast* addresses. But there 
is a difference, I think, between semantics that describe the *type of address* and semantics that actively describe *what the recipient is going to do*. It's the latter that I was getting at.

(This applies to Carsten's comment too. Port numbers or multiple addresses per host are not actively describing what the recipient will do; they're just numbers.)

Also, I tried not to express shock and horror at the notion of semantics in address, but concern about how this will impact existing hardware and software.

> 
> Thanks for any clarification,
> 
> Ted
>

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status