Re: [v6ops] IPv6 Extension Headers in the Real World

Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> Fri, 03 October 2014 18:54 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@isi.edu>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADEB81A1A73 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Oct 2014 11:54:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.686
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.686 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.786] autolearn=ham
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 1eCiQjXQv6m6 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Oct 2014 11:54:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from darkstar.isi.edu (darkstar.isi.edu [128.9.128.127]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B87361A1A62 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 3 Oct 2014 11:54:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [128.9.160.81] (nib.isi.edu [128.9.160.81]) (authenticated bits=0) by darkstar.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s93IritD012096 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 3 Oct 2014 11:53:45 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <542EF0BA.2070604@isi.edu>
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2014 11:53:46 -0700
From: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>, "Metzler, Dan J" <dan-metzler@uiowa.edu>, Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
References: <542A36AC.9030203@gont.com.ar> <542C81B7.10601@isi.edu> <99A3738D-954C-4A75-8055-E30D0D73DD80@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <EMEW3|fe883999a173b6d6b6b574badb6ebb53q90Niq03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|99A3738D-954C-4A75-8055-E30D0D73DD80@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <542C8595.6080809@isi.edu> <CAKD1Yr2JB6V61D+JcUR2qj6-AGEAQr+Jn0eOUPSLEOKXZ1cEqw@mail.gmail.com> <9062DD5BB047BF4C96BCE0CB9DA96D1B4DE1C0C7@ITSNT440.iowa.uiowa.edu> <E69F8B2A-C8F9-4978-B2F8-0F6C74619BA0@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <EMEW3|0e9b5822392d744642b47f8f3cb94f76q91ED603tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|E69F8B2A-C8F9-4978-B2F8-0F6C74619BA0@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <542D695A.3070506@isi.edu> <9062DD5BB047BF4C96BCE0CB9DA96D1B4DE22159@ITSNT440.iowa.uiowa.edu> <542EAFEF.30607@gont.com.ar>
In-Reply-To: <542EAFEF.30607@gont.com.ar>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/381UWdexMxJ-Spph0EdNlBJTj2c
Cc: "draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-in-real-world@tools.ietf.org" <draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-in-real-world@tools.ietf.org>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>, V6ops Chairs <v6ops-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] IPv6 Extension Headers in the Real World
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2014 18:54:48 -0000


On 10/3/2014 7:17 AM, Fernando Gont wrote:
> And you certainly do not want the "here's what we saw", "here's how we'd
> like you to filter packets with EHs", "here's what the IETF should
> consider when designing new protocols", because they tend to be rather
> orthogonal, and also targeted at different communities.  -- the guy
> doing the packet filtering is likely different from the guy developing
> new protocols, etc.

The coupling of these determines how you act. It determines whether you
can filter safely, only when under threat or in a particular
environment, or should not filter under any circumstances.

And that's why it's dangerous to split these out. These should not be
targeted at different communities without a single, coherent context of
both what is known to happen, what the risks are, and the recommendations.

Ultimately, we need an Internet whose behavior is coherent, not based on
potentially interfering communities perceived as being orthogonal.

Joe