CARP

I was reading through the list archives and noticed a comment,

"Please summarize on the list what you find out. I recognize that core
BSD folks have more clues than I'll ever have, but I'm really annoyed
how childishly they behave, instead of writing draft describing CARP
and getting protocol number from IANA, you have to read CARP source
and fear the setup you've explained above.
To more describe the anti-social behaviour they said they've chosen
protocol number not used by any relevant protocol, sigh."

Just so you know,

1. the IANA was rude and dismissive in their response to BSD's request
for a CARP protocol number (this is in spite of the protocol being documented
and implemented with a BSD license)

2. far from anti-social, BSD's carp implementation currently uses a
protocol number far above anything the IANA has allocated so it won't clash
on people's existing networks or with future IANA protocols that are allocated



--
"Attacks always get better; they never get worse."
-- " NSA saying"

juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp (AT) puck (DOT) nether.net

Tue, 25 2005, Chris Cappuccio wrote:

I was reading through the list archives and noticed a comment,
>
"Please summarize on the list what you find out. I recognize that core
BSD folks have more clues than I'll ever have, but I'm really annoyed
how childishly they behave, instead of writing draft describing CARP
and getting protocol number from IANA, you have to read CARP source
and fear the setup you've explained above.
To more describe the anti-social behaviour they said they've chosen
protocol number not used by any relevant protocol, sigh."
>
Just so you know,
>
1. the IANA was rude and dismissive in their response to BSD's request
for a CARP protocol number (this is in spite of the protocol being documented
and implemented with a BSD license)
>
2. far from anti-social, BSD's carp implementation currently uses a
protocol number far above anything the IANA has allocated so it won't clash
on people's existing networks or with future IANA protocols that are allocated
>

#35

As a final note of course, when we petitioned IANA, the IETF body
regulating "official" internet protocol numbers, to give us numbers for
CARP and pfsync our request was denied. Apparently we had failed to go
through an official standards organization. Consequently we were forced to
choose a protocol number which would not conflict with anything else of
value, and decided to place CARP at IP protocol 112. We also placed pfsync
at an open and unused number. We informed IANA of these decisions, but
they declined to reply.

This ridiculous situation then inspired one of our developers to create
this parody of the well-known Monty Python skit and song.

m

>
>
--
"Attacks always get better; they never get worse."
-- " NSA saying"

juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp (AT) puck (DOT) nether.net

>

juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp (AT) puck (DOT) nether.net

I'm curious Did anyone ever submit an Internet draft to the IETF?

Tony


25, 2005, at 4:29 PM, Matt Yaklin wrote:

>
>
Tue, 25 2005, Chris Cappuccio wrote:
>
>
>I was reading through the list archives and noticed a comment,
>>
>"Please summarize on the list what you find out. I recognize that
>core
>BSD folks have more clues than I'll ever have, but I'm really
>annoyed
>how childishly they behave, instead of writing draft describing CARP
>and getting protocol number from IANA, you have to read CARP source
>and fear the setup you've explained above.
>To more describe the anti-social behaviour they said they've chosen
>protocol number not used by any relevant protocol, sigh."
>>
>Just so you know,
>>
>1. the IANA was rude and dismissive in their response to BSD's
>request
>for a CARP protocol number (this is in spite of the protocol being
>documented
>and implemented with a BSD license)
>>
>2. far from anti-social, BSD's carp implementation currently
>uses a
>protocol number far above anything the IANA has allocated so it
>won't clash
>on people's existing networks or with future IANA protocols that
>are allocated
>>
>>
>
#35
>
As a final note of course, when we petitioned IANA, the IETF body
regulating "official" internet protocol numbers, to give us numbers
for
CARP and pfsync our request was denied. Apparently we had failed to go
through an official standards organization. Consequently we were
forced to
choose a protocol number which would not conflict with anything
else of
value, and decided to place CARP at IP protocol 112. We also placed
pfsync
at an open and unused number. We informed IANA of these decisions, but
they declined to reply.
>
This ridiculous situation then inspired one of our developers to
create
this parody of the well-known Monty Python skit and song.
>
m
>
>
>>
>>
>--
>"Attacks always get better; they never get worse."
>-- " NSA saying"
>
>juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp (AT) puck (DOT) nether.net
>
>>
>>

juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp (AT) puck (DOT) nether.net

>


juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp (AT) puck (DOT) nether.net