[136156] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: quietly....
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dave Israel)
Tue Feb 1 15:45:52 2011
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 15:44:40 -0500
From: Dave Israel <davei@otd.com>
To: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>
In-Reply-To: <D422E116-B0F8-4E2F-952A-F5473AD98BDB@muada.com>
X-otd-MailScanner-From: davei@otd.com
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 2/1/2011 3:32 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> On 1 feb 2011, at 21:03, Dave Israel wrote:
>
>> People want to engineer their networks they way they want to. Let them. If their way is stupid, then they'll have the stupidly engineered network they wanted.
> The problem is that their stupidity impacts ME. If I want to talk to Microsoft from behind a< 1500 byte MTU link: too bad, not going to happen. They stupidly send packets with DF=1 but filter incoming packet too big messages.
>
> So I'm all in favor of the IETF blocking stupidity whenever possible.
>
I completely agree that, when interoperating, you have to follow the
rules, and I would (naively) hope that "customers cannot reach me
because of my configuration choice" is sufficient incentive to fix the
problem for the majority of network operators. But what I am arguing
against was the stance some people take against DHCPv6, or prefix
lengths longer than /64, or other internal-to-my-network,
why-should-you-care choices I might make. Telling me it is dumb is
fine; implementing software/hardware/protocols such that I can't do it
simply because you think it is dumb is a problem.
-Dave
