IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] WG Doc? draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops

"Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com> Sat, 12 March 2016 19:07 UTC

Return-Path: <fred@cisco.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 6170612D723 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Mar 2016 11:07:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -114.522
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-114.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 i9gO7XllwGgI for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Mar 2016 11:07:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-5.cisco.com (alln-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.142.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9497312D714 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Mar 2016 11:07:12 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1846; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1457809632; x=1459019232; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=bWfGPA2BBLcP+avI35/G46nX5pLWGdrtnYL2Os6OEFY=; b=XfbGhi7ya/OZ3wjHi8+kHB///SD++7ICQI8jsdGWpDZcMdCRlZaMCt48 Qk9b00kRLSq+jSLzD98fDDxCUtRCxuUlB8qrGIBm8xDYEwLijYfl6GT24 RUTrLsvwTwWbI6/ijO8C+/yCPPbjANEV+Dn/GOoEDa5wtnWraaTb8e/dk s=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 833
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CwAgD0Z+RW/49dJa1dgz6BPwa6KA6BbYYNAoEnOBQBAQEBAQEBZBwLhEEBAQEDAXkFCwIBCBguMiUCBA4FDogOCLx0AQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBDQiIC4JPh2WBDwWXSwGDGoFmiH+BT402jnwBHgFDg2RqiHZ+AQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.24,326,1454976000"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="246826170"
Received: from rcdn-core-7.cisco.com ([173.37.93.143]) by alln-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Mar 2016 19:07:11 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-015.cisco.com (xch-rcd-015.cisco.com [173.37.102.25]) by rcdn-core-7.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u2CJ7BjD025224 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sat, 12 Mar 2016 19:07:11 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-013.cisco.com (173.37.102.23) by XCH-RCD-015.cisco.com (173.37.102.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Sat, 12 Mar 2016 13:07:10 -0600
Received: from xch-rcd-013.cisco.com ([173.37.102.23]) by XCH-RCD-013.cisco.com ([173.37.102.23]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Sat, 12 Mar 2016 13:07:10 -0600
From: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
To: "otroan@employees.org" <otroan@employees.org>
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] WG Doc? draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops
Thread-Index: AQHRe3z+jjdZn/af1k6rS4wakEAZsw==
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 19:07:10 +0000
Message-ID: <988AECA3-61E1-4B45-AC39-A9EFF086854A@cisco.com>
References: <A277BE71-BD70-4AFE-97DA-F224D7DBBCB8@cisco.com> <BDA56C2D-788D-421C-B44A-1A29578F0F78@employees.org> <56E318C7.5020200@gmail.com> <F57DFD38-FC99-45AE-B41D-51B0565148B1@employees.org>
In-Reply-To: <F57DFD38-FC99-45AE-B41D-51B0565148B1@employees.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-mailer: Apple Mail (2.3112)
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.19.64.115]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_4836A0D0-E26E-46AC-9BA8-286EA742FDB8"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/cSs_fbxjGkJU_c-bTLVLPntdspM>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] WG Doc? draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 19:07:14 -0000

> On Mar 12, 2016, at 8:53 AM, otroan@employees.org wrote:
> 
> Given that EHs are rarely used

One specific point that worries me in this discuss is the indiscriminate reference to extension headers. One of the is the Security Header; I use the IPv4 variant of that (I believe along with UDP) when I use AnyConnect or Cisco CVO, which is to say "pretty much invariably". If the call is to deprecate extension headers, do we deprecate IPsec? What other instance of "baby vs bathwater" are there?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email