IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] Another tunnel/VPN scenario (was RE: Reasons for WGLC/RFC asap)

Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com> Thu, 03 December 2020 22:17 UTC

Return-Path: <wes@mti-systems.com>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7DF53A0D74 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:17:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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=mti-systems-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 XdFwKYTPu6cx for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:17:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt1-x82e.google.com (mail-qt1-x82e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82e]) (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 7D9EC3A0D76 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:17:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt1-x82e.google.com with SMTP id a6so202992qtw.6 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 03 Dec 2020 14:17:55 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mti-systems-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=uiAGluiJT+kQ8rTOm/UMiSCpRGqfKjvO04VsGsAqai8=; b=DVuWGFPfO3uzktcgDlXtbK+fPd2lgQ/dm1P1ULIq7auwkqY9B4p5rRaS/hgRegO75X iABUhTMwYZP4MMbcrjVpX5grB6gpUUcuZur+8wfMF3xUM2gHBlWeCkJJMI8MGQmzSyr4 jUcn9ZZ+AxGi3C7CiwC174XX5+1RaVUxLtS587xNnSKDTtpHfL2xmycO9czTKCK+r4ZF lNknQPLp4UV2hxjkfwVITadFxhjkVm9Ek8ddT4rQjg9Vcwl9BSPIhFHg2XBFrrb4cnMX FNgfqB7v/UqL6BKDAwyVxorElTWMTarZnCBBuGlrZRp2fnUn9JAIHM2EIA327x29RZUl HuVw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=uiAGluiJT+kQ8rTOm/UMiSCpRGqfKjvO04VsGsAqai8=; b=fJNozK7apDpbxeGvCwmtNm/03CHixBxatoLH7A+wIS8SGt5ng57BU7B/NSvq6WKNSO 0WxVefHR1W1JXrLIF5+CuPuzawCauvp6/Go55PmdxOHgNn1j5JRDoeoJfgO2yIHAkls2 fLla7M1kLWLjsOkQIHdXqmyUNhTIAUHy8CvDofS/qWW3RkPQW31ZDfuivFpIT83tzfLf wb3UQO8amFoeaM9jYk62aZV+TAToEbLavgKjvfZClkzkhhC/OsobJK2Hn12/x1Ab0fMN ajPM6jlXyUqKuyiLd/7uyLEa0Zf0xREWgHOH+ReOTs7Axd3g25Hdy79SAxxIzq/XTlFG fA/Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530O/RFZq0OUsEC3cDXwNIMPKVWVfooK70ZYxs79keENqdLzZKrf EkvAPSozQakKEBQEbw0fXFFNodlVXbRxBSVO
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwNoe74JSxWq0H2Or05QLpFM/85YUH2mrCU7y3ijMO6Exgsa9zn7oSaLGilQxOpRwn8IfB+mQ==
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:594c:: with SMTP id 12mr5724716qtz.224.1607033874150; Thu, 03 Dec 2020 14:17:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.3] (cpe-174-102-117-3.columbus.res.rr.com. [174.102.117.3]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r201sm2708180qka.114.2020.12.03.14.17.52 for <tsvwg@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 03 Dec 2020 14:17:53 -0800 (PST)
To: tsvwg@ietf.org
References: <MN2PR19MB4045A76BC832A078250E436483E00@MN2PR19MB4045.namprd19.prod.outlook.com> <HE1PR0701MB2876A45ED62F1174A2462FF3C2FF0@HE1PR0701MB2876.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <56178FE4-E6EA-4736-B77F-8E71915A171B@gmx.de> <0763351c-3ba0-2205-59eb-89a1aa74d303@bobbriscoe.net> <CC0517BE-2DFC-4425-AA0A-0E5AC4873942@gmx.de> <35560310-023f-93c5-0a3d-bd3d92447bcc@bobbriscoe.net>
From: Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com>
Message-ID: <b86e3a0d-3f09-b6f5-0e3b-0779b8684d4a@mti-systems.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2020 17:17:51 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <35560310-023f-93c5-0a3d-bd3d92447bcc@bobbriscoe.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/QmlPtJN4hip8MHUNSHbWq1EnSX4>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] Another tunnel/VPN scenario (was RE: Reasons for WGLC/RFC asap)
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsvwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2020 22:17:57 -0000

(chair hat on)

I wish this thread was making progress in any way, but I don't see it, 
and it's become a bit heated again.

I think we can probably close this thread, since the scenario described 
is well understood, usual suspects have clearly expressed their 
thoughts, and going back and forth doesn't seem to be convincing to one 
another in any way.

FYI, there are 762 people on this mailing list, and we're aware that the 
tone getting too hot discourages some from participating in the 
conversation.  I *would* like to hear from others or anyone with new 
perspectives to contribute, rather than just the handful of people that 
we are hearing a lot from.

v2.26.15 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status