IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] LISP support for draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-00

james woodyatt <jhw@google.com> Wed, 12 April 2017 20:34 UTC

Return-Path: <jhw@google.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AC9F129564 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 13:34:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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=google.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 CbdsVHbkZe9Z for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 13:34:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf0-x22a.google.com (mail-pf0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22a]) (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 7853312EB38 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 13:34:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id o126so18745582pfb.3 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 13:34:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=from:mime-version:subject:date:references:to:in-reply-to:message-id; bh=MklIcxZI3SKbkSRtVLX3soaXhfQaYWTHi1lBKq0lZCo=; b=V6TJiJP41SUY2cuxtklyACh3MS+/OEtIGuNal91u5lGahwXQYxuStcCbyJaqDe9ZP+ YOF0XIUXJzSLiT1R42CZN3hkDTROYLG70bK8+Hst1uiRs4ocoqv8IUBp1QWudP6WtNdd Mg/fjTjWS25bLxtafvlb1GGLj2H4LLd/CIkV5HbsuAjlxD5ETWtQJOHIIPA10yrZSyUo gPuefPgE0HMIoJloRBLMo45HATbE2zzy1XIEUsPembifWDvmAbqkTJi32i4X0OLD5Y2C 3NWEo7TBLIlc6XC1/IIS7U+GTD8L+RX5Qmg+qPUnIeRIjnvuNvjW32R7tb5Yxuyimf9Y sznw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:subject:date:references:to :in-reply-to:message-id; bh=MklIcxZI3SKbkSRtVLX3soaXhfQaYWTHi1lBKq0lZCo=; b=dvMyg0NO59OUwvmBSyZd2r6dusN6/srDKxRbNO2xnY/CpyiSAIlosFElNTVVb79C74 76bubaj6DRev5mUEJ1ZrGtj6NcDswhQ7dTAocw9+hIoSEeRBNYBS2tNjF2xX7qBNGzNz fQ63xKFsXcZ6bAaAAvNTb6fFn6v8yJ4+FC9suwnKbHZG+MUYm+Og1CguagVM6jWF/Cg/ iGg/AYrkwa0g+OFWBv1A2GX71LjipRlVW2VMGTofPfhBJDzwgOQKZezsMbFYnuwizVmp 4YwVDgkLovLu2ViE6/i3+mvHY7xmw946eo7Jhcd05AO6OblXHvOoAJRUdJVKRTNTioUT 5ypw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H0g8t95ZRgNr2Y6UlzwgZpnoKZ5rGKCYG4+W+CVN6A8jaould5Sze8rBjVNbi4/zaKo
X-Received: by 10.98.1.213 with SMTP id 204mr69487280pfb.51.1492029243761; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 13:34:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dhcp-100-99-230-134.pao.corp.google.com ([100.99.230.134]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e76sm38096510pfk.75.2017.04.12.13.34.02 for <v6ops@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 12 Apr 2017 13:34:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: james woodyatt <jhw@google.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_89C2D7F1-ABD2-4907-90B2-537C4E3E0135"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 11:50:36 -0700
References: <D8F5C737-B01A-4EC8-9175-C4921C0CD69F@consulintel.es> <392D675B-73C4-40D3-81A8-A06907F5581D@employees.org> <3BBFC922-85BD-49B5-B39E-227F191BD48C@consulintel.es> <729244A1-E7AB-4BA0-8B39-A6122D2C32DB@employees.org> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933009E4C3B8@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DB194A8@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <E8AB2CCD-B563-446F-BA96-D18F735F72B6@gmail.com>
To: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <E8AB2CCD-B563-446F-BA96-D18F735F72B6@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <CB307EF9-F003-45F5-B86C-2B7F95D9552B@google.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/KD9hqwsR6zDVDrFxFTdJni9Q4pk>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] LISP support for draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-00
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 20:34:09 -0000

On Apr 12, 2017, at 10:22, Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> A data point of interest: https://ccdcoe.org/multimedia/hedgehog-fog-creating-and-detecting-ipv6-transition-mechanism-based-information.html <https://ccdcoe.org/multimedia/hedgehog-fog-creating-and-detecting-ipv6-transition-mechanism-based-information.html> is being flagged in the media as a reason to not deploy IPv6 - transition technologies that use tunnels apparently bypass intrusion detection technologies.


After seeing Fig 3. on p. 6 of that paper, I don’t think I can offer a sensible response to such arguments in any form other than a sarcastic quip embedded in an image macro.


--james woodyatt <jhw@google.com <mailto:jhw@google.com>>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email