Brian Carpenter
(via tiny screen & keyboard)
Ø I, too, believe the practical discussion rather belongs to LKML.
No. RFC 7094 permitted Linux people to do what they did.
They are fully compliant with this standard RFC.
They are not compliant with RFC 6437 but it is not their problem to sync RFCs.
From: ietf [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Töma Gavrichenkov
Sent: Sunday, August 8, 2021 10:28 PM
To: David Farmer <farmer@xxxxxxx>
Cc: Tom Herbert <tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; 6man WG <ipv6@xxxxxxxx>; IETF discussion list <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: IPv6 Anycast has been killed by LINUX patch in 2016 - who cares?
Peace,
On Sun, Aug 8, 2021, 10:03 PM David Farmer <farmer@xxxxxxx> wrote:
While I agree with you, anycast is an important capability in the Internet architecture
This is sort of an achievement already given some reckless claims on the IETF mailing list! Thank you.
nevertheless it has many limitations, and is not the panacea you claim it to be, even for DDoS.
If you consider the client-server model, it *is* the panacea, fundamentally, but I agree that p2p and other models of communications might require something else. My bad, didn't consider these before.
Furthermore, I’m not sure what you or the original reporter of this problem expect the IETF to do to fix the problem that was reported.
Honestly, I've just been answering the questions other people have, sharing my experience.
I, too, believe the practical discussion rather belongs to LKML.
--
Töma
