netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
To: Ishaan Gandhi <ishaangandhi@gmail.com>,
	Andreas Roeseler <andreas.a.roeseler@gmail.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
	Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
Subject: rfc5837 and rfc8335
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2021 14:35:18 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <a41352e8-6845-1031-98ab-6a8c62e44884@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6a7f33a5-13ca-e009-24ac-fde59fb1c080@gmail.com>

On 3/19/21 10:24 PM, David Ahern wrote:
> At the end of the day, what is the value of this feature vs the other
> ICMP probing set?

Merging the conversations about both of these RFCs since my comments and
questions are the same for both.

What is the motivation for adding support for these RFCs? Is the push
from a company or academia (e.g., a CS project)?

Realistically, who is expected to use this feature and why given the
information it leaks about the networking configuration of the node. Why
is this tool expected to be more useful than a network operator using
existing protocols like lldp, collecting that data across nodes and
analyzing, or using tools like suzieq[1]?

RFC 5837 has been out for 11 years. Do any operating systems support it
— e.g., networking vendors like Cisco, Juniper, etc.? If not, why not?
This one seems to me the most dubious at this point in time.

Similarly for RFC 8335, what is the current support for it?

Linux does not need to support an RFC just because it exists. I am
really questioning the value of both of them

[1] https://github.com/netenglabs/suzieq

  reply	other threads:[~2021-03-20 20:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-03-17 22:19 [PATCH v3] icmp: support rfc5837 ishaangandhi
2021-03-19 14:55 ` David Ahern
2021-03-19 16:11   ` Ishaan Gandhi
2021-03-19 23:54     ` David Ahern
2021-03-20  0:53       ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-03-20  4:24         ` David Ahern
2021-03-20 20:35           ` David Ahern [this message]
2021-03-22  1:50             ` rfc5837 and rfc8335 Ishaan Gandhi
     [not found]               ` <CAJByZJBNMqVDXjcOGCJHGcAv+sT4oEv1FD608TpA_e-J2a3L2w@mail.gmail.com>
     [not found]                 ` <BL0PR05MB5316A2F5C2F1A727FA0190F3AE649@BL0PR05MB5316.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
2021-03-25  3:19                   ` David Ahern
2021-03-29 14:49                     ` Ron Bonica
2021-03-29 19:39                       ` Ron Bonica
2021-03-31 14:04                         ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-03-31 17:56                           ` Ron Bonica
2021-04-08 22:03                           ` Ishaan Gandhi
2021-05-03  1:41                             ` RESEND " Ishaan Gandhi

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=a41352e8-6845-1031-98ab-6a8c62e44884@gmail.com \
    --to=dsahern@gmail.com \
    --cc=andreas.a.roeseler@gmail.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=ishaangandhi@gmail.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
    --cc=willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).