[Int-area] Safe(r) Limited Domains…

Hi there all, A few of us (Andrew Alston, Éric Vyncke, Suresh Krishnan, Donald Eastlake and myself) have been working on a mechanism to make "limited domains" protocols safe(r) to deploy. The 50,000ft [0] view is that fail-closed domains are inherently easier to protect than fail-open, and so th

[Int-area] Re: Call for Adoption: draft-fenner-intarea-extended-icmp-hostid-02 (End 09/20/2024)

I support adoption of this draft... On Thu, Sep 05, 2024 at 2:32 PM, Jen Linkova wrote: > I support adoption. > > This draft is very useful for cases beyond ones mentioned in the draft. In > particular, we are going to abandon > draft-equinox-intarea-icmpext-xlat-source and suggest that CLAT ut

[Int-area] Re: New version of ICMP Node Identification draft

On Sat, Jul 13, 2024 at 9:03 AM, Bill Fenner wrote: > Hi, > > I've submitted version -02 of https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/ > draft-fenner-intarea-extended-icmp-hostid/ , which is an RFC4884-based > ICMP extension that allows supplying a textual hostname and/or a single > identifying IPv4/IPv6

Re: [Int-area] [EXTERNAL] Re: draft-chroboczek-intarea-v4-via-v6 - "IPv4 routes with an IPv6 next hop"

bing Interfaces" <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fenner-int-probe-clarification/> ). W > > *From:* Int-area *On Behalf Of *Bob Hinden > *Sent:* Monday, January 22, 2024 11:24 AM > *To:* Warren Kumari > *Cc:* Internet Area > *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: [Int-

Re: [Int-area] draft-chroboczek-intarea-v4-via-v6 - "IPv4 routes with an IPv6 next hop"

invalidation, naming things, and off-by-one errors." — Jeff Atwood(?) W > I think this is a good idea and support it. I will try to review it and > provide more comments. The ICMP behavior is an interesting problem. > > Bob > > > > On Jan 22, 2024, at 6:39 AM, Wa

[Int-area] draft-chroboczek-intarea-v4-via-v6 - "IPv4 routes with an IPv6 next hop"

Hi there all, I discovered that I'd somehow misnamed a draft that Juliusz Chroboczek , Toke Høiland-Jørgensen, and myself had written — somehow I'd managed to name it draft-chroboczek-int-v4-via-v6, instead of draft-chroboczek-intarea-v4-via-v6. Anyway, it is targeted at intarea, and so I renamed

[Int-area] draft-chroboczek-int-v4-via-v6-02 - "IPv4 routes with an IPv6 next hop"

Hi there, Doc: draft-chroboczek-int-v4-via-v6 - "IPv4 routes with an IPv6 next hop" Back in August 2022, when draft-ietf-babel-v4viav6 was going through IESG eval, I raised the concern that something this fundamental (and, frankly

[Int-area] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-intarea-rfc7042bis-10: (with COMMENT)

Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-intarea-rfc7042bis-10: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer

Re: [Int-area] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-intarea-rfc7042bis-10: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 11:51 PM, Donald Eastlake wrote: > Hi Warren, > > On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 1:48 PM Warren Kumari via Datatracker ietf.org> wrote: > > > > Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for > > draft-ietf-

[Int-area] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-intarea-rfc7042bis-10: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-intarea-rfc7042bis-10: Discuss When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to

Re: [Int-area] GPS over wifi

On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 8:31 AM S Moonesamy wrote: > > Dear Rob, > At 04:13 AM 22-01-2020, Rob Brew wrote: > >Having received the post from Alex I have responded. If you would > >rather I move this RFC to antarea I will do so. Personally I feel > >it's more of an internet problem as GPS is being

Re: [Int-area] Adam Roach's Discuss on draft-ietf-intarea-provisioning-domains-10: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 12:26 AM Adam Roach via Datatracker wrote: > > Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-intarea-provisioning-domains-10: Discuss > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and C

[Int-area] Warren Kumari's Yes on draft-ietf-intarea-provisioning-domains-10: (with COMMENT)

Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-intarea-provisioning-domains-10: Yes When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please

Re: [Int-area] Discussion about Section 6.1 in draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile

On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 3:53 PM Tom Herbert wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 11:29 AM Bob Hinden wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Based on the discussion, I would like to propose to see if this will > > resolve the issues raised. It attempts to cover the issues raised. > > > > The full section 6.1 i

Re: [Int-area] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-16: (with COMMENT)

On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 1:57 PM Fred Baker wrote: > > > > Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways... > > It was taken out in response to Warren Kumari’s comment that it was out of > place and already covered in a section later in the document. If it is added > back in, it proba

Re: [Int-area] Warren Kumari's Yes on draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-15: (with COMMENT)

On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 2:53 PM Geoff Huston wrote: > > > > > On 9 Aug 2019, at 10:27 am, Bob Hinden wrote: > > > > Tom, > > > >> On Aug 9, 2019, at 7:47 AM, Tom Herbert wrote: > >> > >> > >> As the document highlights the problems of fragmentation are caused by > >> nonconformant middlebox imple

Re: [Int-area] Warren Kumari's Yes on draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-15: (with COMMENT)

On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 6:55 AM Fernando Gont wrote: > > On 8/8/19 00:58, Warren Kumari via Datatracker wrote: > > Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for > > draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-15: Yes > > > > When responding, please keep the subjec

[Int-area] Warren Kumari's Yes on draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-15: (with COMMENT)

Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-15: Yes When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to

[Int-area] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-intarea-broadcast-consider-08: (with COMMENT)

Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-intarea-broadcast-consider-08: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however

Re: [Int-area] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-intarea-broadcast-consider-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

ing while writing this. It sounds like you have, so I'll clear my discuss shortly. Thank you, W > > Best, > > Rolf > > Am 25.01.18 um 00:58 schrieb Warren Kumari: > >> Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for >> draft-ietf-intarea-broadcast

[Int-area] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-intarea-broadcast-consider-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-intarea-broadcast-consider-08: Discuss When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please

Re: [Int-area] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-intarea-probe-09: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Ron Bonica wrote: > Hi Warren, > > Thanks for the review. Comments inline... > >Happy Holidays, > Ron > >> -Original Message- >> From: Warren Kumari [mailto:war.

[Int-area] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-intarea-probe-09: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-intarea-probe-09: Discuss When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https

Re: [Int-area] IPv10.

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Khaled Omar wrote: > So in your opinion, what should happen now? Updating the I-D only? Or we > should go forward? Or the IPv10 draft is not interesting at all? I believe that the IETF has shown no interest in working on the IPv10 draft, and so you should a: aban

Re: [Int-area] Fw: IPv10, KRP (RRP) IDs.

... and the email which was sent to you. https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/tllVkC8PXR9pv1OsuM53Pg4bLnA W On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 11:46 AM Erik Kline wrote: > You probably want to read the RFCs and NOTE WELL about contributions to > the IETF. > > On 6 June 2017 at 00:10, Khaled Omar w

Re: [Int-area] Upcoming NomCom season

On Thursday, July 2, 2015, Ralph Droms wrote: > Brian - thanks for your hard work and for doing a great job as AD. > > + lots. I've always found your discusses well reasoned and thought-out, you are always encouraging to new ideas, and generally pleasant to work with. W > - Ralph > > > On Jul

[Int-area] Call for adoption of draft-bonica-intarea-gre-mtu-06

[ Apologies for breaking mail threading - I am subscribed to the list, and the mailman interface believes that I should be getting for this list, but somehow my mailer is selectively not getting int-area mail. Now that I know, I'll go try figure out why... ] I support adoption of this document. I

Re: [Int-area] [OPSEC] [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-gont-opsec-ipv6-eh-filtering-00.txt

On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 12:21 AM, Fernando Gont wrote: > On 07/17/2014 04:38 PM, Joe Touch wrote: They need to be characterized as what they are: - an attempt to accommodate devices that are NOT IPv6-compliant >>> >>> I'd have a hard time coming uup with a vendor/device th

Re: [Int-area] [6MAN] Re: [v6ops] Limiting the size of the IPv6 header chain (draft-ietf-6man-oversized-header-chain)

On Jun 12, 2013, at 6:07 PM, sth...@nethelp.no wrote: >>> However, anything that says "if the chain is >X, then drop" is broken, >>> period. >> >> FWIW, I don't think anyone has proposed "if the chain is larger than X, >> then drop". > > On the other hand - I, as an operator, may well decide to

Re: [Int-area] [6MAN] Re: [v6ops] Limiting the size of the IPv6 header chain (draft-ietf-6man-oversized-header-chain)

On Jun 12, 2013, at 2:44 PM, Robert Elz wrote: > Date:Wed, 12 Jun 2013 19:49:08 +0200 > From:Gert Doering > Message-ID: <20130612174908.gt2...@space.net> > > | Loop back to about 50 messages earlier in this thread, > > I don't generally read this list (any more) - just

Re: [Int-area] Call for adoption of draft-carpenter-flow-label-balancing-02

[ Replying midway through the thread as somehow my MUA et the original…] On Dec 20, 2012, at 8:38 PM, Liubing (Leo) wrote: > I'm in favor of it. It's a good use case of flow label for L3/4 load > balancing. > > Thanks > > B.R. > Bing > >> -Original Message- >> From: int-area-boun...

Re: [Int-area] Comments on draft-ietf-intarea-nat-reveal-analysis-02

On Jul 10, 2012, at 4:14 AM, Eggert, Lars wrote: > On Jul 10, 2012, at 1:26, Wesley Eddy wrote: >> On 7/9/2012 4:41 PM, Tina TSOU wrote: >>> The TCP option is another good way to include the HOST ID in case of TCP >>> and UDP communications. >> >> Surely there's a typo there, since it does not

Re: [Int-area] I-D Action: draft-shen-traceroute-ping-ext-03.txt

is operation let's say cost 100% of the normal Traceroute > processing, > but here we hope it does not do this for every Traceroute packet, and it > actually checks to see > if this is from an authorized network or station for using this feature. And > this is a new feature &

Re: [Int-area] I-D Action: draft-shen-traceroute-ping-ext-03.txt

t;> document makes sense. We need to listen very carefully to what >> operators are saying. We want to provide them with tools that will >> actually help them. If they have concerns (which they do), and we >> brush them off, we may well end up spending a lot of time developing a >> solution that they won't ever get used. That's not a good use of >> anyone's time/effort. >> >> Thomas >> >> ___ >> Int-area mailing list >> Int-area@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area > > ___ > Int-area mailing list > Int-area@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area > --- Don't be impressed with unintelligible stuff said condescendingly . -- Radia Perlman. Warren Kumari war...@kumari.net ___ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

Re: [Int-area] I-D Action: draft-shen-traceroute-ping-ext-03.txt

On Jan 3, 2012, at 2:33 PM, Carlos Pignataro wrote: > Joel, Jared, > > On 12/27/2011 8:03 PM, Jared Mauch wrote: >> Joel, >> >> On Dec 24, 2011, at 1:28 PM, Joel jaeggli wrote: >> >>> So, something targeted through the forwarding plane that filters up to >>> the control plane will be filtered

Re: [Int-area] I-D Action: draft-shen-traceroute-ping-ext-03.txt

On Jan 3, 2012, at 10:29 AM, George, Wes wrote: >> From: int-area-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:int-area-boun...@ietf.org] On >> Behalf Of Tissa Senevirathne (tsenevir) >> Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 9:49 PM >> To: Jared Mauch; Naiming Shen (naiming) >> Cc: Thomas Narten; Carlos Pignataro (cpig

Re: [Int-area] FW: New Version Notification for draft-george-ipv6-required-02.txt

2011, at 4:53 PM, Jared Mauch wrote: > >> I support adoption of this draft as well. >> >> >> - Jared Mauch >> >> On Jun 2, 2011, at 1:17 PM, Warren Kumari wrote: >> >>> I firmly support adoption of this draft >>> >>> (I

Re: [Int-area] FW: New Version Notification for draft-george-ipv6-required-02.txt

On Jun 1, 2011, at 10:47 AM, George, Wesley wrote: > After the discussion of this draft in Prague and with the WG chairs and ADs, > we have updated it to address a few comments, but primarily to remove the > language directing IETF action. This limits the draft to simply requiring > IPv6 for I

Re: [Int-area] ipv4-id-update question on routers setting DF bit

On May 13, 2011, at 3:54 PM, Joe Touch wrote: > > > On 5/13/2011 12:10 PM, Warren Kumari wrote: >> >> On May 12, 2011, at 6:51 PM, Joe Touch wrote: >> >>> Hi, all, >>> >>> I sent this note quite a while ago, but got no discussion. &g

Re: [Int-area] ipv4-id-update question on routers setting DF bit

On May 12, 2011, at 6:51 PM, Joe Touch wrote: > Hi, all, > > I sent this note quite a while ago, but got no discussion. > > Please send comments soon; I plan to revise the document shortly. > > Thanks, > > Joe > > On 4/1/2011 2:51 AM, Joe Touch wrote: >> Hi, all, >> >> A separate discussion

Re: [Int-area] Asking for int-area review of: draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security-03.txt

Just a friendly reminder (the next one comes with a point stick) that we'd appreciate comments (if you have any) by 00:00 09/25/2010 W On Sep 10, 2010, at 4:09 PM, Warren Kumari wrote: Hey all, This document (draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security) has completed OpSec WG last call, but due t

[Int-area] Asking for int-area review of: draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security-03.txt

appreciate your views and input within 2 weeks (by 00:00 09/25/2010) if you could. Thank you Warren Kumari (OpSec WG co-chair). ___ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area