Subject: [Efficientnd-dt] No quorum today

From: Erik Nordmark <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 07:26:28 -0700

Pascal and I chatted for a bit.

It would be good for folks to look over the AIs and also the draft I 
sent out 2 weeks ago, so we can get something done as DT output before 
Honolulu.

I think it would make sense to put the list of DAD problems from Ole's 
emails in a draft as well - just to be able to inform the WG.
Any volunteer for that?

    Erik

---

From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2014 07:20:38 +0000

Worth reading, and, probably, re-reading...

http://blog.bimajority.org/2014/09/05/the-network-nightmare-that-ate-my-week/ 

What do you think?

Pascal

---

From: Lorenzo Colitti <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2014 16:32:45 +0900

Sounds like someone blaming the protocol instead of a bad design because
it's always better to blame someone else than to blame oneself?

On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <
[email-masked]> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> Efficientnd-dt mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/efficientnd-dt
>

---

From: Erik Kline <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2014 17:01:36 +0900

Agreed, that's how I read it.

---

From: Bob Hinden <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2014 11:06:47 +0300

Discussion on this started on the IETF list too.

Bob

On Sep 8, 2014, at 11:01 AM, Erik Kline <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Sounds like someone blaming the protocol instead of a bad design because it's always better to blame someone else than to blame oneself?
> 
> On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <[email-masked]> wrote:

---

From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2014 08:07:53 +0000

Could you elaborate?

What was exactly badly designed and by whom?

And from there, what would you recommend this guy to do?

Cheers,

Pascal

From: Erik Kline [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: lundi 8 septembre 2014 10:02
To: Lorenzo Colitti
Cc: Pascal Thubert (pthubert); [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Efficientnd-dt] No quorum today

On 8 September 2014 16:32, Lorenzo Colitti <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
Sounds like someone blaming the protocol instead of a bad design because it's always better to blame someone else than to blame oneself?

On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
Worth reading, and, probably, re-reading...

What do you think?

Pascal

_______________________________________________
Efficientnd-dt mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/efficientnd-dt

_______________________________________________
Efficientnd-dt mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/efficientnd-dt

---

From: Lorenzo Colitti <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2014 17:18:30 +0900

A switch that doesn't allow fast-pathing, rate-limiting or dropping MLD
packets to the control plane, but falls over when getting too many of them
is badly designed. A network that sends MLD group queries every 10 seconds
but falls over when they are responded to is badly designed. A broken NIC
driver that... etc.

As to what the guy should do, don't know... maybe a change of careers to a
field where he has more in-depth knowledge? :-)

But seriously - know the limitations of your gear, and design for them.
There's not really much in this problem that is specific to the design of
IPv6. The same could happen in IPv4 on a switch that didn't fast-path or
proxy ARP. Remember how ARP storms were feared?

On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <
[email-masked]> wrote:

> *From:* Erik Kline [mailto:[email-masked]]
> *Sent:* lundi 8 septembre 2014 10:02
> *To:* Lorenzo Colitti
> *Cc:* Pascal Thubert (pthubert); [email-masked]
> *Subject:* Re: [Efficientnd-dt] No quorum today
>
>
>