Taking this new "philosophy of limited domain" to its bitter conclusion
A is Internet Standard B is also Internet Standard for "Limited Domain" that violates A C is also Internet Standard for "Limited Domain" that violates A D is also Internet Standard for "Limited Domain" that violetes C so by transitive chain D violates C and hence A but not B. Hence D and B can be deployed together (maybe) but not any other combination. So what purposes will IETF serve. To define 4 different "standards" that have "limited domain violation dependencies" amongst each other but based on algebra closure can sometimes be deployed together. And we will track this and call that "standards" ? Really ? --- tony On Sun, Oct 3, 2021 at 6:13 AM Brian E Carpenter < brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ron, > > The first sentence cites RFC8402 which unambiguously describes SR as a > limited domain protcol (limited to an "SR domain", that is.) > > So within such a domain, this describes using 128 bit quantities called > Segment Identifiers that in some cases, but apparently not in the formats > defined here, has the same structure as an IP address. > > Does that harm the Internet, even if it leaks? It might disappoint the > sender, as any sender of a bogus packet is disappointed, but apart from > that, > who is damaged? > > Regards > Brian Carpenter > > On 02-Oct-21 09:34, Ron Bonica wrote: > > Folks, > > > > > > > > Draft-filsfilscheng-spring-srv6-srh-compression-02 introduces three new > SID types that can occupy the Destination Address field of an IPv6 header. > See Sections 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 of the draft for details. > > > > > > > > The SPRING WG has issued a call for adoption for this draft. > > > > > > > > It is not clear that these SID types can be harmonized with the IPv6 > addressing architecture. > > > > > > > > Does anyone have an opinion? > > > > > > > > > > Ron > > > > > > > > > > Juniper Business Use Only > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > > i...@ietf.org > > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > i...@ietf.org > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- >
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
