Subject: Re: [spring] RFC8200 update?

From: Fernando Gont <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2020 01:07:23 -0300

On 29/2/20 07:45, Robert Raszuk wrote:
[...]
> 
> And to be very clear - I am not saying you are wrong. Perhaps you look 
> at train analogy - sure if each passenger would start messing with train 
> car/wagons construction the train would clearly not go far. But if so we 
> just need a new train architecture rather then saying - oh no Mr. SR you 
> can not travel at all.

A number of us have been talling you, for a long time now, that these 
proposals (PSP, TI-LFA) change the architecture.

Rather than admitting they do require a change in the architecture, you 
have tried to pretend they fit in the current architecture.

Rather than focusing your energy in making your case for changing it, 
all these discussions have been wasting everyone's time trying to make 
each of us believe that these behaviors are currently supported by IPv6.

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: [email-masked]
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492