Le 2013-02-28 20:51, Ole Troan a ?crit : > - Is there interest in working on it in 6man? > (if yes, you must be willing to contribute, if no, then say why)
Yes, Someone said: Why do a document for IPv6 for Things That Were Well Known in IPv4? and i wonder: Why not do it right in IPv6, even though we know it is a problem that has existed for IPv4? IPv6 is a new protocol, and probably in a few years the new generation of internet professionals might hear about IPv4, as we hear today about IPX, (as History). I understand that this is a known weakness, even so could affect some systems, so why not correct this? I think this topic deserves further discussed regards Juan Antonio Matos Dominican Civil Aviation Institute > 1. Re: 6MAN Agenda for IETF86 (Fernando Gont) > 2. Re: Next steps for draft-gont-6man-predictable-fragment-id > (Simon Perreault) > 3. Re: Next steps for draft-gont-6man-predictable-fragment-id > (Ole Troan) > 4. Re: Next steps for draft-gont-6man-predictable-fragment-id > (Simon Perreault) > 5. Re: Next steps for draft-gont-6man-predictable-fragment-id > (Fernando Gont) > 6. Re: Next steps for draft-gont-6man-predictable-fragment-id > (Simon Perreault) > 7. Re: Next steps for draft-gont-6man-predictable-fragment-id > (Ole Troan) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 00:27:11 -0300 > From: Fernando Gont <fg...@si6networks.com> > To: Bob Hinden <bob.hin...@gmail.com> > Cc: ipv6@ietf.org > Subject: Re: 6MAN Agenda for IETF86 > Message-ID: <5138090f.9030...@si6networks.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Bob, > > On 03/05/2013 07:42 PM, Bob Hinden wrote: > > > >> draft-gont-6man-ipv6-smurf-amplifier : 2 discussion on the list : > >> 15 mins > > > > This was the chairs call as we thought there would be interest in it. > > Given the discussion on the list, there appears to be more interest > > in <draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-problem-01.txt> and we propose to > > swap them. There isn't time for everything. > > > > Comments? > > I personally oppose to such idea. This is my reasoning: > > * draft-gont-6man-ipv6-smurf-amplifier has already been in the position > of "this will be discussed if time permits" (and at the time, time > didn't permit). Hence it's time to allocate a slot to this I-D. The same > reasoning should apply to draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-problem-01.txt > for the next IETF meeting. > > * draft-gont-6man-ipv6-smurf-amplifier is pretty much straight-forward > so that may be one reason for which you didn't see more discussion about > it. I'd expect that discussion during the 6man wg meeting will be brief, > and hence we'll be able to move forward to the next document even before > the allocated time is used. > > * Changing agendas once published is, IMO, a bad idea (unless really > necessary). > > > FWIW, I should note that I do support > draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-problem-01.txt -- i.e., the reasoning > above doesn't have anything to do with the contents of > draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-problem-01.txt itself. > > Thanks, > -- > Fernando Gont > SI6 Networks > e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com > PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492 > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 10:44:27 +0100 > From: Simon Perreault <simon.perrea...@viagenie.ca> > To: ipv6@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Next steps for draft-gont-6man-predictable-fragment-id > Message-ID: <5138617b.5020...@viagenie.ca> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Le 2013-02-28 20:51, Ole Troan a ?crit : > > - Is there interest in working on it in 6man? > > (if yes, you must be willing to contribute, if no, then say why) > > Yes. > > I think the document is very useful. The fact that there are so many > popular implementations out there that get this kind of thing wrong > shows a need for good documentation. This draft explains the problem, > says clearly what needs to be done, and describes good and practical > algorithms. And there's a survey of current implementations as a bonus > in the appendix. This is exactly the kind of good quality information > that the IETF needs to provide. > > Simon > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 11:09:55 +0100 > From: Ole Troan <o...@cisco.com> > To: Simon Perreault <simon.perrea...@viagenie.ca> > Cc: ipv6@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Next steps for draft-gont-6man-predictable-fragment-id > Message-ID: <65cb8751-4cbf-46de-9860-8964be8aa...@cisco.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > Simon, > > >> - Is there interest in working on it in 6man? > >> (if yes, you must be willing to contribute, if no, then say why) > > > > Yes. > > > > I think the document is very useful. The fact that there are so many > popular implementations out there that get this kind of thing wrong shows a > need for good documentation. This draft explains the problem, says clearly > what needs to be done, and describes good and practical algorithms. And > there's a survey of current implementations as a bonus in the appendix. > This is exactly the kind of good quality information that the IETF needs to > provide. > > - are you willing to work on the document? > - do you think this should be done in 6man or elsewhere? > > cheers, > Ole > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 11:13:47 +0100 > From: Simon Perreault <simon.perrea...@viagenie.ca> > To: Ole Troan <o...@cisco.com> > Cc: ipv6@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Next steps for draft-gont-6man-predictable-fragment-id > Message-ID: <5138685b.4040...@viagenie.ca> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Le 2013-03-07 11:09, Ole Troan a ?crit : > > Simon, > > > >>> - Is there interest in working on it in 6man? > >>> (if yes, you must be willing to contribute, if no, then say why) > >> > >> Yes. > >> > >> I think the document is very useful. The fact that there are so many > popular implementations out there that get this kind of thing wrong shows a > need for good documentation. This draft explains the problem, says clearly > what needs to be done, and describes good and practical algorithms. And > there's a survey of current implementations as a bonus in the appendix. > This is exactly the kind of good quality information that the IETF needs to > provide. > > > > - are you willing to work on the document? > > Yes. > > > - do you think this should be done in 6man or elsewhere? > > 6man > > Simon > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 07:28:24 -0300 > From: Fernando Gont <fg...@si6networks.com> > To: Ole Troan <o...@cisco.com> > Cc: ipv6@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Next steps for draft-gont-6man-predictable-fragment-id > Message-ID: <51386bc8.4090...@si6networks.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Ole, > > On 03/07/2013 07:09 AM, Ole Troan wrote: > > > > - are you willing to work on the document? > > I'm really curious about these questions. > > What does "working on a document" mean? For instance, it's probably the > first time I see this question asked when polling the wg for support of > a document. > > > > > - do you think this should be done in 6man or elsewhere? > > That aside, this document aims to update RFC 2460. Where else should > that be done, if not in 6man?? > > Thanks, > -- > Fernando Gont > SI6 Networks > e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com > PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492 > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 11:44:08 +0100 > From: Simon Perreault <simon.perrea...@viagenie.ca> > To: Fernando Gont <fg...@si6networks.com> > Cc: Ole Troan <o...@cisco.com>, ipv6@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Next steps for draft-gont-6man-predictable-fragment-id > Message-ID: <51386f78.8010...@viagenie.ca> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Le 2013-03-07 11:28, Fernando Gont a ?crit : > > What does "working on a document" mean? For instance, it's probably the > > first time I see this question asked when polling the wg for support of > > a document. > > It's common. I understand it to mean reviewing the draft, providing > comments, etc. > > > That aside, this document aims to update RFC 2460. Where else should > > that be done, if not in 6man?? > > That's a technicality. What's more important is that the relevant > expertise is in 6man. > > Simon > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 12:02:27 +0100 > From: Ole Troan <o...@cisco.com> > To: Simon Perreault <simon.perrea...@viagenie.ca> > Cc: Fernando Gont <fg...@si6networks.com>, ipv6@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Next steps for draft-gont-6man-predictable-fragment-id > Message-ID: <be2d7d21-963f-4215-8389-0005064a6...@cisco.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > Simon, > > >> What does "working on a document" mean? For instance, it's probably the > >> first time I see this question asked when polling the wg for support of > >> a document. > > > > It's common. I understand it to mean reviewing the draft, providing > comments, etc. > > yes. > > >> That aside, this document aims to update RFC 2460. Where else should > >> that be done, if not in 6man?? > > > > That's a technicality. What's more important is that the relevant > expertise is in 6man. > > when this document was presented in 6man at IETF84, there were suggestions > that a more generic > document could be written. e.g. in intarea. > > I don't want us to end up with an RFC per field per protocol. > > there isn't an equivalent document for IPv4, right? > > there are other alternatives too, e.g. an errata to 2460, or an update to > the nodes requirement document. > > cheers, > Ole > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > ipv6 mailing list > ipv6@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > > > End of ipv6 Digest, Vol 107, Issue 9 > ************************************ >
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
