IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] ULA draft revision #2 Regarding isolated networks

Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> Tue, 27 May 2014 04:23 UTC

Return-Path: <lorenzo@google.com>
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 6F9961A0368 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 May 2014 21:23:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.029
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.029 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 CMGBOIXwTF-p for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 May 2014 21:23:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-x236.google.com (mail-ie0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D3351A0360 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 May 2014 21:23:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ie0-f182.google.com with SMTP id x19so985763ier.27 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 May 2014 21:23:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=qD1W3Q8hrPrudHzDAHx10BGxPt5o+apKm0kDWbDXEG4=; b=erH6SmrqjrXmudhx6Q6FLQ96Ahrd8mSuiOT7AbJ9exyi73ks5pI8T+LXSzG0dRAZZC VrNY/F60VLkH93UTqE4BTEc4PK3beKPuKFvKZenB6XjLJMnpES2C6nJK0UNTRMzY9AAD hBQe9RbBfV9sW4m80sGsDO7Ae425ezOYEmTRDYmxPG54TCnYM23V2AhhaJVR8TS8PGLa yASzsvh6Ow7zNUg/HMEs9Bg6H9bYvQWjxXVvksnzxkpWsStTP2e1CZiBtMXNkWCiNbvg rNgy8X5sC4z0cYhDzRgFgYS7b/DGr6grpL6/3l/5o0iJcmdLF62+nZ7fwDTFMZhqUAZt OBJQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=qD1W3Q8hrPrudHzDAHx10BGxPt5o+apKm0kDWbDXEG4=; b=Ts5zVHKLkYdWFvDTIZb7TRo0PaK3IkKjEo1XSf1o74Sr0mxTjBQj2XQdclayscsV+/ xC5KToRo/SZvpAkMF2BqzYih7dOvQGavZC3hsoqqFo+RmCbwLz+X7jWl9TkosyGfkNE/ DGmTt5o4HiZf7RD52bIYmyL34/OsSgMR+R4u0WqjUoe/g6yBRN5laoK8dzJywOwPRcwo XAOlUunn2uRpjrnSFKjCc8+W2HBmIhCkQcENaoLhbGw0JiODY3bS1OgUNHUduadC7K5K L0pWauKBPDIrS/iCDQkQ7yfpgckDexr/241Tgymvh3qtJdm3q48BmruQhn7ogn/jaMHM ZiGA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnCw9qoiguOww8EBmuquOvnxIkN7nFl1FrdN2W95DszfUqKAdetxnRIVWL7JBi8Cj+C4hSk
X-Received: by 10.50.79.227 with SMTP id m3mr29503033igx.47.1401164630173; Mon, 26 May 2014 21:23:50 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.64.18.203 with HTTP; Mon, 26 May 2014 21:23:29 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <m2mwe37tbn.wl%randy@psg.com>
References: <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F453D8B6B9A@nkgeml506-mbx.china.huawei.com> <m261ks7xww.wl%randy@psg.com> <53840070.90801@gmail.com> <m2y4xn7wep.wl%randy@psg.com> <53840723.8010606@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr1O_poMR200sjU=ttRvGaeQRkC1ZfXC0Ok4uQxdq3K=NQ@mail.gmail.com> <m2mwe37tbn.wl%randy@psg.com>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 13:23:29 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKD1Yr2t3-vxuG=iDi4biBNFpJwuzuHgfpB74i_uydWWRV7qZg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e01175f5d0dc95604fa5a10b1"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/wuXTKAfxEEO-TuTY1-Vhfa1NTdU
Cc: v6ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] ULA draft revision #2 Regarding isolated networks
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: Tue, 27 May 2014 04:23:54 -0000

On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:

> >
> > OK, we agree that "forever isolated" just means "will be connected in the
> > future". But if we agree on that, then we must accept that "forever
> > isolated" is no different from "temporarily isolated". Therefore:
> >
> > 1. There is only one case - "temporarily isolated".
> > 2. We should not design for "forever isolated", since it does not
> >    exist.
>
> damn!  houston, we have found a clueon!
>

Just wanted to put that down in writing very clearly. If everyone agrees
with it, then great - call me an idiot for stating the obvious. If people
don't agree with it, then better to find that out sooner rather than later.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email