On Sun, 12 Sep 2010 11:58:45 +0200 (CEST) Mikael Abrahamsson <swm...@swm.pp.se> wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Sep 2010, Mark Smith wrote: > > > On Sun, 12 Sep 2010 07:29:10 +0200 (CEST) > > Mikael Abrahamsson <swm...@swm.pp.se> wrote: > > > >> On Sun, 12 Sep 2010, Mark Smith wrote: > >> > >>> So my question was how would you solve it (architecturally)? > >>> > >>> Layer 2 devices inspecting traffic isn't architecturally acceptable > >>> because it's a layer violation, > >> > >> +1 on what Steinar Haug wrote. > >> > >> Serious disconnect between map and reality here, Mark. > > > > If you think that, then I don't think you've read my emails > > properly. > > ... or there is a serious disconnect between your reality and my reality. > > By saying that L2 devices doing L3 inspection is a layer violation and > isn't acceptable, What I said was, and I'll highlight the key word, "Layer 2 devices inspecting traffic isn't *architecturally* acceptable because it's a layer violation" The best place to fix IPv6 issues in in IPv6. If you fix try to them at the layer below, you end up with layer 2 specific solutions, and will need one for every existing and new layer 2 that comes along. If, however, you solve them in IPv6, then you have a single solution that is applicable to every layer 2, both current and future ones. It comes down to solving the problem once and for all, rather than readdressing it each and every time you encounter it in a slightly different scenario. One of the ultimate consequence of this layer violation is that perfectly capable layer 2 devices are going to have to be replaced to support IPv6 if people want to obtain IPv4/IPv6 feature parity. On the scale IPv6 is going to be deployed, that is an awfully large amount of perfectly functioning layer 2 equipment that is going to be discarded. So I accept layer violations to perform some of these functions, but I think it'd be preferable if they could be avoided. > you've dismissed the way millions of people are > connected to the internet as... er, I don't know. Not acceptable and > wrong. > > If I have misunderstood your posting, please enlighten me. > > -- > Mikael Abrahamsson email: swm...@swm.pp.se -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
