From sacadmin Tue May 29 09:00:06 2007 Received: from sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sfbaymail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.42]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4TG06HU002856 for ; Tue, 29 May 2007 09:00:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-4.sun.com (brmea-mail-4.Sun.COM [192.18.98.36]) by sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l4TFwmJB009261 for ; Tue, 29 May 2007 08:58:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-amer-06.sun.com ([192.18.108.180]) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l4TFwmab013108 for ; Tue, 29 May 2007 15:58:48 GMT Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JIT00B0185KDC00@mail-amer.sun.com> (original mail from Sebastien.Roy@Sun.COM) for psarc@sac.sfbay.sun.com; Tue, 29 May 2007 09:58:47 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [129.148.174.103] by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JIT0021X8DY0R53@mail-amer.sun.com>; Tue, 29 May 2007 09:58:47 -0600 (MDT) Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 11:58:33 -0400 From: Sebastien Roy Subject: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP Sender: Sebastien.Roy@Sun.COM To: psarc@sac.sfbay.sun.com Cc: clearview-iteam Message-id: <465C4DA9.2090603@sun.com> Organization: Sun Microsystems MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070423) Status: RO Content-Length: 6318 I'm submitting this fast-track for myself. The timer expires on 06/05/2007. EOF of Mobile IP ================ This case proposes to announce the obsolescence of Mobile IP in the next patch or micro release, and remove Mobile IP functionality from the next minor or major release. Details ======= Mobile IP was introduced into Solaris 9 (and later back-ported to Solaris 8) for at the request of one customer. The One Pager for PSARC 1999/111 states that this customer was the primary consumer, and that at the time, the customer had "agreed in principle to incorporate Mobile IP functionality into their new cellular telephony equipment, which is to be built using a Solaris platform." This never happened. The customer evaluated the Mobile IP implementation that was integrated in Solaris, but never rolled out any products which used it. Since then, no customers have been known to use the implementation, and the code has remained untested and unused (there is an STC mobile IP test suite, but PIT has never run it). Many projects have integrated into Solaris without testing Mobile IP, and have inadvertently broken some key Mobile IP features such as reverse tunneling (something which customers would have discovered and escalated had they been using it). In addition to the inoperative status of reverse tunneling in Solaris 10 and Nevada, mipagent also contains some architectural bugs that cannot realistically be fixed due to lack of testing infrastructure and resources. Namely, as described in 4152864, it configures multiple IP tunnels between the same pair of IP addresses, creating a demultiplexing ambiguity that is impossible to untangle. The upcoming Clearview project will disallow the creation of more than one tunnel between the same pair of IP addresses, in theory causing failures in mipagent operation (if it could be made to work at all). The mipagent daemon also uses the obsolete SEA SNMP library, which has been EOF'ed already as part of LSARC/2006/150. There are no plans to enhance mipagent to use a more modern interface such as SMA. Since there is no plan to fix or enhance mipagent, it will either become more broken, or we can simply remove it. This case proposes to remove it and all related interfaces which are of no value other than to interact with mipagent. Removing Mobile IP from Solaris is not as simple as undoing everything that Mobile IP projects previously did. Some of the interfaces implemented by Mobile IP projects and previously approved by PSARC will remain due to their general applicability to other technologies. The breakdown of which interfaces are affected by this EOF and which are not is contained in the interface tables in the "Affected Interfaces" section below. The proposal is to modify the documentation of affected interfaces to reflect their obsolescence in the next solaris patch or micro release, then remove the interfaces from the next minor or major release. Related PSARC Cases: ==================== 1999/111 Mobile IP project 1999/439 Mobile IP RFE's 1999/445 Mobile IP Fixups 2000/013 MobileIP IPv4 socket options 2000/072 ARP ioctls for Mobile IP (removed by 2003/088) 2000/094 Bitmask flags for reverse tunneling 2000/117 IP option for reverse tunneling in MobileIP 2000/145 Reverse Tunnel for mipagent 2000/162 Updates to Mobile-IP AAA Interface Specication 2000/202 IP_RECVIF socket option for raw socket 2000/239 IP_UNICAST_IF socket option for Mobile IP (removed by 2001/350) 2000/299 Mobile-IP AAA Interface Specification 2000/409 AAA Protocol Update 2001/138 Mobile IP Dynamic Interface Detection 2001/350 MobileIP Socket Extension 2001/355 Netstat Update for Mobile IP 2001/505 IPsec For Mobile IP Related CRs =========== 6479886 mipagent and related kernel interfaces should be removed 6511070 mobile IP code in onnv is in dubious state. Affected Interfaces =================== _________________________________________________________________________ | Interfaces Removed by This Case | |_______________________________|_______________________|_______________| |Interface | Classification | Comments | |_______________________________|_______________________|_______________| | mipagent(1M) | Committed | 1999/111 | | mipagentstat(1M) | Committed | 1999/111 | | mipagentconfig(1M) | Committed | 1999/111 | | mipagent.conf | Project Private | 1999/111 | | IFF_MIPRUNNING | Committed | 1999/439 | | /etc/snmp/conf/mipagent.reg | Project Private | 1999/445 | | /etc/snmp/conf/mipagent.acl | Project Private | 1999/445 | | /var/run/.mipagentstat_door | Project Private | 1999/445 | | RTA_SRCIFP | Committed | 2000/094 | | netstat -f inif filter | Committed | 2001/355 | | netstat -f src filter | Committed | 2001/355 | |_______________________________|_______________________|_______________| The following are interfaces introduced by Mobile IP related work and _not_ being removed by this case. They are either in use by unrelated subsystems, or generally useful to administrators. _________________________________________________________________________ | Interfaces Not Removed by This Case | |_______________________________|_______________________|_______________| |Interface | Classification | Comments | |_______________________________|_______________________|_______________| | /usr/lib/libmd5.so.1 | Committed | 1999/111 | | MD5Init(), | | | | MD5Update(), | | | | MD5Final(), | | 1999/111 | | md5_calc() | | | | SIOCSLIFNAME | Committed | 1999/439 | | IFF_NORTEXCH | Committed | 1999/439 | | RTF_PRIVATE | Committed | 1999/439 | | route(1M) -private | Committed | 1999/439 | | IP_RECVIF | Committed | 2000/013 | | IP_RECVSLLA | Committed | 2000/013 | | RTA_SRC | Project Private | 2000/094 | | IP_RECVTTL | Committed | 2000/117 | | IP_XMIT_IF | Consolidation Private | 2001/350 | | netstat -f outif filter | Committed | 2001/355 | | netstat -f dst filter | Committed | 2001/355 | | netstat -f af filter | Committed | 2001/355 | | netstat -f flags filter | Committed | 2001/355 | |_______________________________|_______________________|_______________| From sacadmin Tue May 29 09:05:15 2007 Received: from sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.154.35]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4TG5FE7003177 for ; Tue, 29 May 2007 09:05:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-2.sun.com (brmea-mail-2.Sun.COM [192.18.98.43]) by sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l4TG3uWt017691 for ; Tue, 29 May 2007 09:03:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-amer-01.sun.com ([192.18.108.175]) by brmea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l4TG3uaX012358 for ; Tue, 29 May 2007 16:03:56 GMT Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JIT001018BN9V00@mail-amer.sun.com> (original mail from Sebastien.Roy@Sun.COM) for psarc@sac.sfbay.sun.com; Tue, 29 May 2007 10:03:56 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [129.148.174.103] by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JIT009NM8MJ6SY1@mail-amer.sun.com>; Tue, 29 May 2007 10:03:56 -0600 (MDT) Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 12:03:41 -0400 From: Sebastien Roy Subject: Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP In-reply-to: <465C4DA9.2090603@sun.com> Sender: Sebastien.Roy@Sun.COM To: Sebastien Roy Cc: psarc@sac.sfbay.sun.com, clearview-iteam Message-id: <465C4EDD.6000508@sun.com> Organization: Sun Microsystems MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <465C4DA9.2090603@sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070423) Status: RO Content-Length: 3536 Thunderbird, upon sending the fast-track message, seems to have automatically converted the tab characters in the interface tables to an incompatible number of spaces. Here's to using "bleeding edge" software! :-) Here are properly formatted interface tables: Affected Interfaces =================== _________________________________________________________________________ | Interfaces Removed by This Case | |_______________________________|_______________________|_______________| |Interface | Classification | Comments | |_______________________________|_______________________|_______________| | mipagent(1M) | Committed | 1999/111 | | mipagentstat(1M) | Committed | 1999/111 | | mipagentconfig(1M) | Committed | 1999/111 | | mipagent.conf | Project Private | 1999/111 | | IFF_MIPRUNNING | Committed | 1999/439 | | /etc/snmp/conf/mipagent.reg | Project Private | 1999/445 | | /etc/snmp/conf/mipagent.acl | Project Private | 1999/445 | | /var/run/.mipagentstat_door | Project Private | 1999/445 | | RTA_SRCIFP | Committed | 2000/094 | | netstat -f inif filter | Committed | 2001/355 | | netstat -f src filter | Committed | 2001/355 | |_______________________________|_______________________|_______________| The following are interfaces introduced by Mobile IP related work and _not_ being removed by this case. They are either in use by unrelated subsystems, or generally useful to administrators. _________________________________________________________________________ | Interfaces Not Removed by This Case | |_______________________________|_______________________|_______________| |Interface | Classification | Comments | |_______________________________|_______________________|_______________| | /usr/lib/libmd5.so.1 | Committed | 1999/111 | | MD5Init(), | | | | MD5Update(), | | | | MD5Final(), | | 1999/111 | | md5_calc() | | | | SIOCSLIFNAME | Committed | 1999/439 | | IFF_NORTEXCH | Committed | 1999/439 | | RTF_PRIVATE | Committed | 1999/439 | | route(1M) -private | Committed | 1999/439 | | IP_RECVIF | Committed | 2000/013 | | IP_RECVSLLA | Committed | 2000/013 | | RTA_SRC | Project Private | 2000/094 | | IP_RECVTTL | Committed | 2000/117 | | IP_XMIT_IF | Consolidation Private | 2001/350 | | netstat -f outif filter | Committed | 2001/355 | | netstat -f dst filter | Committed | 2001/355 | | netstat -f af filter | Committed | 2001/355 | | netstat -f flags filter | Committed | 2001/355 | |_______________________________|_______________________|_______________| From sacadmin Wed May 30 11:54:28 2007 Received: from sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.154.35]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4UIsSeK010381 for ; Wed, 30 May 2007 11:54:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-2.sun.com (brmea-mail-2.Sun.COM [192.18.98.43]) by sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l4UIr8PK025363 for ; Wed, 30 May 2007 11:53:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-amer-04.sun.com ([192.18.108.178]) by brmea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l4UIr8MW007030 for ; Wed, 30 May 2007 18:53:08 GMT Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JIV00D01AYGMQ00@mail-amer.sun.com> (original mail from Sebastien.Roy@Sun.COM) for psarc@sac.sfbay.sun.com; Wed, 30 May 2007 12:53:08 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [129.148.174.178] by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JIV00DLBB4JENC5@mail-amer.sun.com>; Wed, 30 May 2007 12:53:08 -0600 (MDT) Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 14:51:59 -0400 From: Sebastien Roy Subject: Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP In-reply-to: <465C4DA9.2090603@sun.com> Sender: Sebastien.Roy@Sun.COM To: Sebastien Roy Cc: psarc@sac.sfbay.sun.com, clearview-iteam Message-id: <465DC7CF.6010304@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <465C4DA9.2090603@sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070508) Status: RO Content-Length: 59 This case was approved during today's PSARC meeting. -Seb From sacadmin Thu May 31 11:07:30 2007 Received: from sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.154.35]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4VI7UdD000235 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 11:07:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.146.108.211] (almas.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.108.211]) by sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l4VI68RT020541; Thu, 31 May 2007 11:06:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <465F0E90.4040408@sun.com> Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 11:06:08 -0700 From: Alan Coopersmith User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070423) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sebastien Roy CC: PSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com, clearview-iteam@sun.com Subject: Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: RO Content-Length: 1265 Since this case proposes to make changes to OpenSolaris code, it needs to go through the open ARC process - closed cases are only appropriate for changes limited to the closed source portions of Solaris. In this particular case, while it may be cathartic to name names and point fingers at which customer made us do all this work and then didn't use it, it's architecturally irrelevant, and the ARC could openly and effectively review it if you had just stopped your opening sentence before naming the customer: Mobile IP was introduced into Solaris 9 (and later back-ported to Solaris 8) for at the request of one customer. and replaced all other instances of the customers name with a non-descript term such as "this customer". Please adjust the case write-up and submit it to the PSARC-Ext mailing list, and change the case status to manual with an open copy of the spec in the case materials. (BTW, in a discussion on the opensolaris community IRC, there was a question of whether this was Mobile IPv6 or just the original IPv4-based Mobile IP. From the earlier cases it looks like the latter, but it would be good to clarify.) -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering From sacadmin Thu May 31 11:53:54 2007 Received: from sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.154.35]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4VIrssX005440 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 11:53:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-3.sun.com (brmea-mail-3.Sun.COM [192.18.98.34]) by sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l4VIqWvJ003703 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 11:52:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-amer-03.sun.com ([192.18.108.177]) by brmea-mail-3.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l4VIqW8X002326 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 18:52:32 GMT Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JIX0040157QI100@mail-amer.sun.com> (original mail from Sebastien.Roy@Sun.COM) for PSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com; Thu, 31 May 2007 12:52:32 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [129.148.174.103] by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JIX003FA5RJNCD3@mail-amer.sun.com>; Thu, 31 May 2007 12:52:31 -0600 (MDT) Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 14:52:15 -0400 From: Sebastien Roy Subject: Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP In-reply-to: <465F0E90.4040408@sun.com> Sender: Sebastien.Roy@Sun.COM To: Alan Coopersmith Cc: PSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com, clearview-iteam@Sun.COM Message-id: <465F195F.6070206@sun.com> Organization: Sun Microsystems MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <465F0E90.4040408@sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070508) Status: RO Content-Length: 2445 Alan Coopersmith wrote: > Since this case proposes to make changes to OpenSolaris code, it needs > to go through the open ARC process - closed cases are only appropriate > for changes limited to the closed source portions of Solaris. > > In this particular case, while it may be cathartic to name names and > point fingers at which customer made us do all this work and then didn't > use it, it's architecturally irrelevant, and the ARC could openly and > effectively review it if you had just stopped your opening sentence > before naming the customer: > > Mobile IP was introduced into Solaris 9 (and later back-ported to > Solaris 8) for at the request of one customer. > > and replaced all other instances of the customers name with a non-descript > term such as "this customer". This is true. > Please adjust the case write-up and submit it to the PSARC-Ext mailing > list, > and change the case status to manual with an open copy of the spec in the > case materials. I assume you're suggesting I change the exposure to "manual", and not the status. I'm willing to do that, but I need clarification on what this means and how to go about managing the differing case materials. The status.allowed file claims: # Cases marked "manual" imply that some details about the # case can be made public; in general, those things are # contained in files that have "opensolaris" in their name. # See "How do I publish/request an existing Sun ARC Case?" # http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/arc/arc-faq/arc-publish-historical-checklist/ I don't know what "in general" means in this context, nor if this implies that files with "opensolaris" in their names are automatically made available in the OpenSolaris case log without further manual intervention. Since the existing mail file can't be made available, sending mail to psarc-ext can't be sufficient to properly archive the open case materials of a "manual" case. I'm missing another step to which I'm not finding adequate documentation. > (BTW, in a discussion on the opensolaris community IRC, there was a > question > of whether this was Mobile IPv6 or just the original IPv4-based Mobile IP. > From the earlier cases it looks like the latter, but it would be good to > clarify.) I don't see how it could have been interpreted any differently, since Solaris has never had a Mobile IPv6 implementation. I'll clarify this in the new spec. -Seb From sacadmin Thu May 31 12:25:46 2007 Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.143]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4VJPj9Q008664 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 12:25:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l4VJOOK1013490; Thu, 31 May 2007 15:24:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l4VJOO1w013487; Thu, 31 May 2007 15:24:24 -0400 (EDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <18015.8423.867343.925967@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 15:24:23 -0400 From: James Carlson To: Sebastien Roy Cc: Alan Coopersmith , PSARC-members@sac.sfbay.sun.com, clearview-iteam@Sun.COM Subject: Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP In-Reply-To: <465F195F.6070206@sun.com> References: <465F0E90.4040408@sun.com> <465F195F.6070206@sun.com> X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Status: RO Content-Length: 973 Sebastien Roy writes: > > Please adjust the case write-up and submit it to the PSARC-Ext mailing > > list, > > and change the case status to manual with an open copy of the spec in the > > case materials. > > I assume you're suggesting I change the exposure to "manual", and not the > status. I'm willing to do that, but I need clarification on what this > means and how to go about managing the differing case materials. The > status.allowed file claims: Given the lack of comment on the case, I'd suggest just moving the 'mail' log aside, editing the file to blot out that customer's name, and moving it back. It stands just fine without that datapoint. Then restart the timer to allow for the open comment that (probably) won't happen. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From sacadmin Thu May 31 12:29:05 2007 Received: from sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sfbaymail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.42]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4VJT53m009199 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 12:29:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.133]) by sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l4VJRi91005527 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 12:27:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l4VJRdZC023676 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 12:27:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JIX00K0178UJ300@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> (original mail from Garrett.Damore@Sun.COM) for PSARC-members@sac.sfbay.sun.com; Thu, 31 May 2007 12:27:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.251.21] ([76.174.83.55]) by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JIX00MP87DRIE80@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com>; Thu, 31 May 2007 12:27:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 12:25:53 -0700 From: "Garrett D'Amore" Subject: Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP In-reply-to: <18015.8423.867343.925967@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Sender: Garrett.Damore@Sun.COM To: James Carlson Cc: Sebastien Roy , Alan Coopersmith , PSARC-members@sac.sfbay.sun.com, clearview-iteam@Sun.COM Message-id: <465F2141.8060706@sun.com> Organization: Sun Microsystems MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <465F0E90.4040408@sun.com> <465F195F.6070206@sun.com> <18015.8423.867343.925967@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0b2 (X11/20070227) Status: RO Content-Length: 1090 James Carlson wrote: > Sebastien Roy writes: > >>> Please adjust the case write-up and submit it to the PSARC-Ext mailing >>> list, >>> and change the case status to manual with an open copy of the spec in the >>> case materials. >>> >> I assume you're suggesting I change the exposure to "manual", and not the >> status. I'm willing to do that, but I need clarification on what this >> means and how to go about managing the differing case materials. The >> status.allowed file claims: >> > > Given the lack of comment on the case, I'd suggest just moving the > 'mail' log aside, editing the file to blot out that customer's name, > and moving it back. It stands just fine without that datapoint. > > Then restart the timer to allow for the open comment that (probably) > won't happen. > Why restart the timer? The case was already approved. Or are you suggesting that the approval be revoked? There can still be open comment in the case log, without it being re-opened. Otherwise, this seems like the prudent thing to do, at least to me. -- Garrett From sacadmin Thu May 31 12:37:59 2007 Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.143]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4VJbx0m010011 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 12:37:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l4VJab0o013548; Thu, 31 May 2007 15:36:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l4VJabYo013545; Thu, 31 May 2007 15:36:37 -0400 (EDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <18015.9157.638715.811470@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 15:36:37 -0400 From: James Carlson To: "Garrett D'Amore" Cc: Sebastien Roy , Alan Coopersmith , PSARC-members@sac.sfbay.sun.com, clearview-iteam@Sun.COM Subject: Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP In-Reply-To: <465F2141.8060706@sun.com> References: <465F0E90.4040408@sun.com> <465F195F.6070206@sun.com> <18015.8423.867343.925967@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <465F2141.8060706@sun.com> X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Status: RO Content-Length: 991 Garrett D'Amore writes: > > Then restart the timer to allow for the open comment that (probably) > > won't happen. > > > > Why restart the timer? The case was already approved. Or are you > suggesting that the approval be revoked? No ... as long as the submitter is ok with restarting the case to accomodate some changed conditions (such as a reasonable request for a better venue), there's no such problem. If the submitter doesn't agree, then we run into the appeals process. > There can still be open comment in the case log, without it being re-opened. I don't see the point to that. Once a case is approved, ARC review is _done_. The project can go ahead and integrate. Why hold indefinite commentary on the case log after having closed the case? -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From Sebastien.Roy@sun.com Thu May 31 13:04:31 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4VK4UAO013487 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 13:04:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l4VK35Jn019825 for <@sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Thu, 31 May 2007 21:03:07 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JIX00H059168900@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Thu, 31 May 2007 13:03:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.98.31]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JIX00CIP915HV60@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Thu, 31 May 2007 13:03:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-amer-04.sun.com ([192.18.108.178]) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l4VK35Md002973 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 20:03:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JIX0020190S0F00@mail-amer.sun.com> (original mail from Sebastien.Roy@Sun.COM) for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Thu, 31 May 2007 14:03:05 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [129.148.174.103] by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JIX00DSX914EJI3@mail-amer.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Thu, 31 May 2007 14:03:05 -0600 (MDT) Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 16:02:48 -0400 From: Sebastien Roy Subject: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP Sender: Sebastien.Roy@sun.com To: psarc-ext@sun.com Cc: clearview-discuss Message-id: <465F29E8.4050605@sun.com> Organization: Sun Microsystems MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070508) Status: RO Content-Length: 7414 I'm re-submitting this fast-track for myself. The case was previously submitted as "closed" and was approved, but it was later determined that it could be made "open". I'm thus re-starting the timer on this case as an open case, and there is no substantive change to the spec since it was previously submitted as a closed case. The timer expires on 06/07/2007. EOF of Mobile IP ================ This case proposes to announce the obsolescence of Mobile IPv4 in the next patch or micro release, and remove Mobile IPv4 functionality from the next minor or major release. Details ======= Mobile IPv4 was introduced into Solaris 9 (and later back-ported to Solaris 8) for at the request of one customer. The One Pager for PSARC 1999/111 states that this customer was the primary consumer, and that at the time, the customer had agreed in principle to incorporate Mobile IP functionality into their product, which was to be built using a Solaris platform. This never happened. The customer evaluated the Mobile IP implementation that was integrated in Solaris, but never rolled out any products which used it. Since then, no customers have been known to use the implementation, and the code has remained untested and unused (there is an STC mobile IP test suite, but PIT has never run it). Many projects have integrated into Solaris without testing Mobile IP, and have inadvertently broken some key Mobile IP features such as reverse tunneling (something which customers would have discovered and escalated had they been using it). In addition to the inoperative status of reverse tunneling in Solaris 10 and Nevada, mipagent also contains some architectural bugs that cannot realistically be fixed due to lack of testing infrastructure and resources. Namely, as described in 4152864, it configures multiple IP tunnels between the same pair of IP addresses, creating a demultiplexing ambiguity that is impossible to untangle. The upcoming Clearview project will disallow the creation of more than one tunnel between the same pair of IP addresses, in theory causing failures in mipagent operation (if it could be made to work at all). The mipagent daemon also uses the obsolete SEA SNMP library, which has been EOF'ed already as part of LSARC/2006/150. There are no plans to enhance mipagent to use a more modern interface such as SMA. Since there is no plan to fix or enhance mipagent, it will either become more broken, or we can simply remove it. This case proposes to remove it and all related interfaces which are of no value other than to interact with mipagent. Removing Mobile IP from Solaris is not as simple as undoing everything that Mobile IP projects previously did. Some of the interfaces implemented by Mobile IP projects and previously approved by PSARC will remain due to their general applicability to other technologies. The breakdown of which interfaces are affected by this EOF and which are not is contained in the interface tables in the "Affected Interfaces" section below. The proposal is to modify the documentation of affected interfaces to reflect their obsolescence in the next solaris patch or micro release, then remove the interfaces from the next minor or major release. Related PSARC Cases: ==================== 1999/111 Mobile IP project 1999/439 Mobile IP RFE's 1999/445 Mobile IP Fixups 2000/013 MobileIP IPv4 socket options 2000/072 ARP ioctls for Mobile IP (removed by 2003/088) 2000/094 Bitmask flags for reverse tunneling 2000/117 IP option for reverse tunneling in MobileIP 2000/145 Reverse Tunnel for mipagent 2000/162 Updates to Mobile-IP AAA Interface Specication 2000/202 IP_RECVIF socket option for raw socket 2000/239 IP_UNICAST_IF socket option for Mobile IP (removed by 2001/350) 2000/299 Mobile-IP AAA Interface Specification 2000/409 AAA Protocol Update 2001/138 Mobile IP Dynamic Interface Detection 2001/350 MobileIP Socket Extension 2001/355 Netstat Update for Mobile IP 2001/505 IPsec For Mobile IP Related CRs =========== 6479886 mipagent and related kernel interfaces should be removed 6511070 mobile IP code in onnv is in dubious state. Affected Interfaces =================== _________________________________________________________________________ | Interfaces Removed by This Case | |_______________________________|_______________________|_______________| |Interface | Classification | Comments | |_______________________________|_______________________|_______________| | mipagent(1M) | Committed | 1999/111 | | mipagentstat(1M) | Committed | 1999/111 | | mipagentconfig(1M) | Committed | 1999/111 | | mipagent.conf | Project Private | 1999/111 | | IFF_MIPRUNNING | Committed | 1999/439 | | /etc/snmp/conf/mipagent.reg | Project Private | 1999/445 | | /etc/snmp/conf/mipagent.acl | Project Private | 1999/445 | | /var/run/.mipagentstat_door | Project Private | 1999/445 | | RTA_SRCIFP | Committed | 2000/094 | | netstat -f inif filter | Committed | 2001/355 | | netstat -f src filter | Committed | 2001/355 | |_______________________________|_______________________|_______________| The following are interfaces introduced by Mobile IP related work and _not_ being removed by this case. They are either in use by unrelated subsystems, or generally useful to administrators. _________________________________________________________________________ | Interfaces Not Removed by This Case | |_______________________________|_______________________|_______________| |Interface | Classification | Comments | |_______________________________|_______________________|_______________| | /usr/lib/libmd5.so.1 | Committed | 1999/111 | | MD5Init(), | | | | MD5Update(), | | | | MD5Final(), | | 1999/111 | | md5_calc() | | | | SIOCSLIFNAME | Committed | 1999/439 | | IFF_NORTEXCH | Committed | 1999/439 | | RTF_PRIVATE | Committed | 1999/439 | | route(1M) -private | Committed | 1999/439 | | IP_RECVIF | Committed | 2000/013 | | IP_RECVSLLA | Committed | 2000/013 | | RTA_SRC | Project Private | 2000/094 | | IP_RECVTTL | Committed | 2000/117 | | IP_XMIT_IF | Consolidation Private | 2001/350 | | netstat -f outif filter | Committed | 2001/355 | | netstat -f dst filter | Committed | 2001/355 | | netstat -f af filter | Committed | 2001/355 | | netstat -f flags filter | Committed | 2001/355 | |_______________________________|_______________________|_______________| From sacadmin Thu May 31 13:12:59 2007 Received: from sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.154.35]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4VKCwmu014325 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 13:12:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.146.108.211] (almas.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.108.211]) by sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l4VKBaje016460; Thu, 31 May 2007 13:11:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <465F2BF8.2010509@sun.com> Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 13:11:36 -0700 From: Alan Coopersmith User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070423) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Garrett D'Amore" CC: James Carlson , Sebastien Roy , PSARC-members@sac.sfbay.sun.com, clearview-iteam@sun.com Subject: Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP References: <465F0E90.4040408@sun.com> <465F195F.6070206@sun.com> <18015.8423.867343.925967@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <465F2141.8060706@sun.com> In-Reply-To: <465F2141.8060706@sun.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: RO Content-Length: 328 Garrett D'Amore wrote: > Why restart the timer? The case was already approved. Was it? The case mail log contains no indication of that, and the IAM file lists the status as: "waiting fast-track 06/05/2007" -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering From sacadmin Thu May 31 13:18:06 2007 Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.143]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4VKI6JI014834 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 13:18:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l4VKGiZn013744; Thu, 31 May 2007 16:16:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l4VKGio0013741; Thu, 31 May 2007 16:16:44 -0400 (EDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <18015.11564.396548.959733@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 16:16:44 -0400 From: James Carlson To: Alan Coopersmith Cc: "Garrett D'Amore" , Sebastien Roy , PSARC-members@sac.sfbay.sun.com, clearview-iteam@Sun.COM Subject: Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP In-Reply-To: <465F2BF8.2010509@sun.com> References: <465F0E90.4040408@sun.com> <465F195F.6070206@sun.com> <18015.8423.867343.925967@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <465F2141.8060706@sun.com> <465F2BF8.2010509@sun.com> X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Status: RO Content-Length: 568 Alan Coopersmith writes: > Garrett D'Amore wrote: > > Why restart the timer? The case was already approved. > > Was it? The case mail log contains no indication of that, > and the IAM file lists the status as: "waiting fast-track 06/05/2007" During PSARC business yesterday. Sebastien just updated the IAM file due to your request. ;-} -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From sacadmin Thu May 31 13:19:35 2007 Received: from jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com (cretaceous [129.146.17.63] (may be forged)) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4VKJZN9015004 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 13:19:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.150.12.53] (vpn-129-150-12-53.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.150.12.53]) by jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l4VKI8bx546238; Thu, 31 May 2007 13:18:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <465F2D6C.7020903@sun.com> Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 10:17:48 -1000 From: Joseph Kowalski User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060925) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alan Coopersmith CC: Sebastien Roy , PSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com, clearview-iteam@sun.com Subject: Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP References: <465F0E90.4040408@sun.com> In-Reply-To: <465F0E90.4040408@sun.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: RO Content-Length: 1865 Alan Coopersmith wrote: > Since this case proposes to make changes to OpenSolaris code, it needs > to go through the open ARC process - closed cases are only appropriate > for changes limited to the closed source portions of Solaris. > > In this particular case, while it may be cathartic to name names and > point fingers at which customer made us do all this work and then didn't > use it, it's architecturally irrelevant, and the ARC could openly and > effectively review it if you had just stopped your opening sentence > before naming the customer: > > Mobile IP was introduced into Solaris 9 (and later back-ported to > Solaris 8) for at the request of one customer. > > and replaced all other instances of the customers name with a > non-descript > term such as "this customer". > > Please adjust the case write-up and submit it to the PSARC-Ext mailing > list, > and change the case status to manual with an open copy of the spec in the > case materials. > > (BTW, in a discussion on the opensolaris community IRC, there was a > question > of whether this was Mobile IPv6 or just the original IPv4-based > Mobile IP. > From the earlier cases it looks like the latter, but it would be good to > clarify.) > Although Alan's technically right, in this particular case is it worth doing the edits and restarts? Will the community actually care? I'm just suggesting we avoid work that doesn't provide much gain. At the time of the last RIF, when LSARC was hit very hard, ARC chairs suggested an attitude of balancing benefit with effort. The cliche is "work smart". I suspect this may also appear in the re-evaluation Rich Green announced yesterday. Certainly this should have been open from the start. Hopefully better tools will help everyone get this right moving forward. Just an opinion. I've nothing further to say on this. - jek3 From sacadmin Thu May 31 13:23:12 2007 Received: from sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.154.35]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4VKNCkj015330 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 13:23:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.146.108.211] (almas.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.108.211]) by sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l4VKLnVm021607; Thu, 31 May 2007 13:21:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <465F2E5D.4010207@sun.com> Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 13:21:49 -0700 From: Alan Coopersmith User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070423) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: James Carlson CC: "Garrett D'Amore" , Sebastien Roy , PSARC-members@sac.sfbay.sun.com, clearview-iteam@sun.com Subject: Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP References: <465F0E90.4040408@sun.com> <465F195F.6070206@sun.com> <18015.8423.867343.925967@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <465F2141.8060706@sun.com> <465F2BF8.2010509@sun.com> <18015.11564.396548.959733@gargle.gargle.HOWL> In-Reply-To: <18015.11564.396548.959733@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: RO Content-Length: 889 James Carlson wrote: > Alan Coopersmith writes: >> Garrett D'Amore wrote: >>> Why restart the timer? The case was already approved. >> Was it? The case mail log contains no indication of that, >> and the IAM file lists the status as: "waiting fast-track 06/05/2007" > > During PSARC business yesterday. Sebastien just updated the IAM file > due to your request. ;-} It's now changed to a later date - it was still waiting fast-track when I sent the mail this morning, so no one had updated it yet since the meeting. (And I'm not really trying to pick on this case in particular - all cases that affect OpenSolaris code need to be open now, this was just the most recent example, and one which several community members had been discussing on IRC yesterday.) -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering From sacadmin Thu May 31 13:41:38 2007 Received: from sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.154.35]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4VKfc59016770 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 13:41:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com (brmea-mail-1.Sun.COM [192.18.98.31]) by sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l4VKeHsl002845 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 13:40:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-amer-05.sun.com ([192.18.108.179]) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l4VKeGB0018404 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 20:40:17 GMT Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JIX00G01A93KI00@mail-amer.sun.com> (original mail from Sebastien.Roy@Sun.COM) for PSARC-members@sac.sfbay.sun.com; Thu, 31 May 2007 14:40:16 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [129.148.174.103] by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JIX0034HAR3LS92@mail-amer.sun.com>; Thu, 31 May 2007 14:40:16 -0600 (MDT) Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 16:39:59 -0400 From: Sebastien Roy Subject: Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP In-reply-to: <465F2E5D.4010207@sun.com> Sender: Sebastien.Roy@Sun.COM To: Alan Coopersmith Cc: James Carlson , "Garrett D'Amore" , PSARC-members@sac.sfbay.sun.com, clearview-iteam@Sun.COM Message-id: <465F329F.8070601@sun.com> Organization: Sun Microsystems MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <465F0E90.4040408@sun.com> <465F195F.6070206@sun.com> <18015.8423.867343.925967@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <465F2141.8060706@sun.com> <465F2BF8.2010509@sun.com> <18015.11564.396548.959733@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <465F2E5D.4010207@sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070508) Status: RO Content-Length: 852 Alan Coopersmith wrote: > James Carlson wrote: >> During PSARC business yesterday. Sebastien just updated the IAM file >> due to your request. ;-} > > It's now changed to a later date - it was still waiting fast-track > when I sent the mail this morning, so no one had updated it yet > since the meeting. The closed case was approved yesterday, and I hadn't yet updated the IAM file to reflect that. Since I'm restarting the review in the open today, I'm doing so for a 7 day period starting today, not since the closed case was submitted. I hope that clears things up. > (And I'm not really trying to pick on this case in particular - all > cases that affect OpenSolaris code need to be open now, this was > just the most recent example, and one which several community > members had been discussing on IRC yesterday.) Understood. -Seb From Nicolas.Williams@sun.com Thu May 31 13:47:18 2007 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4VKlISE017233 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 13:47:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l4VKjd6Y034427; Thu, 31 May 2007 14:45:39 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JIX00M01B0JAP00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 31 May 2007 13:45:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from binky.central.sun.com ([129.153.128.104]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JIX00L6FB0JR3D0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 31 May 2007 13:45:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from binky.central.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by binky.central.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l4VKiS1k001206; Thu, 31 May 2007 15:44:28 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from nw141292@localhost) by binky.central.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/Submit) id l4VKiSFe001205; Thu, 31 May 2007 15:44:28 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 15:44:28 -0500 From: Nicolas Williams Subject: Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP In-reply-to: <465F29E8.4050605@sun.com> To: Sebastien Roy Cc: psarc-ext@sun.com, clearview-discuss Message-id: <20070531204428.GF27420@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <465F29E8.4050605@sun.com> X-Authentication-warning: binky.central.sun.com: nw141292 set sender to Nicolas.Williams@sun.com using -f User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.7i Status: RO Content-Length: 242 I understand that the original customer for this never used it and that parts of Solaris' Mobile IP support are broken. But, are there really no real or potential users of / uses for mobile IP in Solaris? What about other OSes? Nico -- From sacadmin Thu May 31 14:03:15 2007 Received: from sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sfbaymail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.42]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4VL3FQk019069 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 14:03:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-4.sun.com (brmea-mail-4.Sun.COM [192.18.98.36]) by sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l4VL1rD9025061 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 14:01:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-amer-06.sun.com ([192.18.108.180]) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l4VL1r6v020656 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 21:01:53 GMT Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JIX00H01BD7JG00@mail-amer.sun.com> (original mail from Mark.J.Nelson@Sun.COM) for PSARC-members@sac.sfbay.sun.com; Thu, 31 May 2007 15:01:53 -0600 (MDT) Received: from mrliberal ([172.20.24.65]) by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JIX002GUBR40R15@mail-amer.sun.com>; Thu, 31 May 2007 15:01:52 -0600 (MDT) Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 15:01:52 -0600 From: "Mark J. Nelson" Subject: Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP In-reply-to: <18015.8423.867343.925967@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Sender: Mark.J.Nelson@Sun.COM X-X-Sender: mjnelson@mrliberal To: James Carlson Cc: Sebastien Roy , Alan Coopersmith , PSARC-members@sac.sfbay.sun.com, clearview-iteam@Sun.COM Reply-to: Mark.J.Nelson@Sun.COM Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <465F0E90.4040408@sun.com> <465F195F.6070206@sun.com> <18015.8423.867343.925967@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Status: RO Content-Length: 831 On Thu, 31 May 2007, James Carlson wrote: > Given the lack of comment on the case, I'd suggest just moving the > 'mail' log aside, editing the file to blot out that customer's name, > and moving it back. It stands just fine without that datapoint. > > Then restart the timer to allow for the open comment that (probably) > won't happen. For this case, I think it highly unlikely. But this leaves the all-too-easy scenario where somebody replies to one of the original case notes, including the text that has the customer name (or whatever data was considered worth eliding), and that reply ends up in the open mail log. Hopefully, that would also include a proprietary/confidential notice, but I don't know if that's guaranteed. Is that a problem that needs to be solved in general, even if not for this case? --Mark From Sebastien.Roy@sun.com Thu May 31 14:18:19 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4VLIIZn020478 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 14:18:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l4VLGqwL013809 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Thu, 31 May 2007 22:16:56 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JIX0020FCG76700@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@Sun.COM); Thu, 31 May 2007 14:16:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-3.sun.com ([192.18.98.34]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JIX001P9CG69I10@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@Sun.COM); Thu, 31 May 2007 14:16:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-amer-06.sun.com ([192.18.108.180]) by brmea-mail-3.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l4VLGsaR028165 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 21:16:54 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JIX00K01BWHAS00@mail-amer.sun.com> (original mail from Sebastien.Roy@Sun.COM) for psarc-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT psarc-ext@Sun.COM); Thu, 31 May 2007 15:16:54 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [129.148.174.103] by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JIX003XBCG5XRM3@mail-amer.sun.com> for psarc-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT psarc-ext@Sun.COM); Thu, 31 May 2007 15:16:54 -0600 (MDT) Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 17:16:37 -0400 From: Sebastien Roy Subject: Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP In-reply-to: <20070531204428.GF27420@Sun.COM> Sender: Sebastien.Roy@sun.com To: Nicolas Williams Cc: psarc-ext@sun.com, clearview-discuss Message-id: <465F3B35.6060205@sun.com> Organization: Sun Microsystems MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <465F29E8.4050605@sun.com> <20070531204428.GF27420@Sun.COM> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070508) Status: RO Content-Length: 636 Nicolas Williams wrote: > I understand that the original customer for this never used it and that > parts of Solaris' Mobile IP support are broken. But, are there really > no real or potential users of / uses for mobile IP in Solaris? I can get you in touch with the people involved with scoping out this technology area from the business side if you want to discuss the business related conclusions that they reached. In short, a decision has been made to remove this from Solaris. > > What about other OSes? Some other OSes have Mobile IP implementations. I don't see that as being related to Solaris architecture. -Seb From Garrett.Damore@sun.com Thu May 31 14:33:16 2007 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4VLXGrC021680 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 14:33:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l4VLVdnp044599 for <@sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Thu, 31 May 2007 15:31:40 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JIX00L0BD57KZ00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@Sun.Com); Thu, 31 May 2007 14:31:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.43.132]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JIX00CGED57HVB0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@Sun.Com); Thu, 31 May 2007 14:31:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l4VLVtoM017377 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 14:31:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JIX00H01D0H2P00@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> (original mail from Garrett.Damore@Sun.COM) for psarc-ext@Sun.Com (ORCPT psarc-ext@Sun.Com); Thu, 31 May 2007 14:31:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.251.21] ([76.174.83.55]) by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JIX00MT8D511Z70@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> for psarc-ext@Sun.Com (ORCPT psarc-ext@Sun.Com); Thu, 31 May 2007 14:31:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 14:30:15 -0700 From: "Garrett D'Amore" Subject: Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP In-reply-to: <465F3B35.6060205@sun.com> Sender: Garrett.Damore@sun.com To: Sebastien Roy Cc: Nicolas Williams , psarc-ext@sun.com, clearview-discuss Message-id: <465F3E67.2010105@sun.com> Organization: Sun Microsystems MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <465F29E8.4050605@sun.com> <20070531204428.GF27420@Sun.COM> <465F3B35.6060205@sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0b2 (X11/20070227) Status: RO Content-Length: 1359 Sebastien Roy wrote: > Nicolas Williams wrote: >> I understand that the original customer for this never used it and that >> parts of Solaris' Mobile IP support are broken. But, are there really >> no real or potential users of / uses for mobile IP in Solaris? > > I can get you in touch with the people involved with scoping out this > technology area from the business side if you want to discuss the > business related conclusions that they reached. In short, a decision > has been made to remove this from Solaris. More to the point, I think there are no real users of the _current_ implementation, and that there are also no potential users of the _current_ implementation in Solaris. If a business case arises requiring a working implementation, then we should look at that... the code that we currently have may be helpful at that time, but it will not be sufficient. > >> >> What about other OSes? > > Some other OSes have Mobile IP implementations. I don't see that as > being related to Solaris architecture. Additionally, it appears that the demand is likely to be the greatest for Mobile IPv6, which we have never had. Apparently certain telcos and large government projects require a functional mobile IPv6 infrastructure. Roland had much to say here about the German national healthcare system, and UMTS. -- Garrett From Nicolas.Williams@sun.com Thu May 31 14:36:16 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4VLaFYZ021916 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 14:36:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l4VLYhR3019431; Thu, 31 May 2007 22:34:53 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JIX00L0HDA3P400@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 31 May 2007 14:34:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from binky.central.sun.com ([129.153.128.104]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JIX00CO4DA3HZA0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 31 May 2007 14:34:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from binky.central.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by binky.central.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l4VLXP8s001294; Thu, 31 May 2007 16:33:25 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from nw141292@localhost) by binky.central.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/Submit) id l4VLXPei001293; Thu, 31 May 2007 16:33:25 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 16:33:25 -0500 From: Nicolas Williams Subject: Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP In-reply-to: <465F3E67.2010105@sun.com> To: "Garrett D'Amore" Cc: Sebastien Roy , psarc-ext@sun.com, clearview-discuss Message-id: <20070531213325.GK27420@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <465F29E8.4050605@sun.com> <20070531204428.GF27420@Sun.COM> <465F3B35.6060205@sun.com> <465F3E67.2010105@sun.com> X-Authentication-warning: binky.central.sun.com: nw141292 set sender to Nicolas.Williams@sun.com using -f User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.7i Status: RO Content-Length: 1005 On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 02:30:15PM -0700, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > Sebastien Roy wrote: > >Nicolas Williams wrote: > >>I understand that the original customer for this never used it and that > >>parts of Solaris' Mobile IP support are broken. But, are there really > >>no real or potential users of / uses for mobile IP in Solaris? > > > >I can get you in touch with the people involved with scoping out this > >technology area from the business side if you want to discuss the > >business related conclusions that they reached. In short, a decision > >has been made to remove this from Solaris. > > More to the point, I think there are no real users of the _current_ > implementation, and that there are also no potential users of the > _current_ implementation in Solaris. > > If a business case arises requiring a working implementation, then we > should look at that... the code that we currently have may be helpful at > that time, but it will not be sufficient. Thanks. Just curious. From erik.nordmark@sun.com Thu May 31 15:33:16 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4VMXFDT027196 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 15:33:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l4VMVetw000782; Fri, 1 Jun 2007 06:31:48 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JIX0050HFWY3W00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 31 May 2007 16:31:46 -0600 (MDT) Received: from jurassic.eng.sun.com ([129.146.106.105]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JIX003BBFWYNC30@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 31 May 2007 16:31:46 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [10.7.251.248] (punchin-nordmark.SFBay.Sun.COM [10.7.251.248]) by jurassic.eng.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4VMVfwn561526 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 31 May 2007 15:31:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 15:31:41 -0700 From: Erik Nordmark Subject: Re: [clearview-discuss] Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP In-reply-to: <20070531204428.GF27420@Sun.COM> To: Nicolas Williams Cc: Sebastien Roy , psarc-ext@sun.com, clearview-discuss Message-id: <465F4CCD.2050809@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <465F29E8.4050605@sun.com> <20070531204428.GF27420@Sun.COM> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0b2 (X11/20070326) Status: RO Content-Length: 706 Nicolas Williams wrote: > I understand that the original customer for this never used it and that > parts of Solaris' Mobile IP support are broken. But, are there really > no real or potential users of / uses for mobile IP in Solaris? It isn't just that it is untested hence potentially broken; it was incomplete by design (with the customer in question signing up to providing certain components to complete what they needed.) I think having complete Mobile IPv4 and IPv6 support in Solaris would be a good thing, but I don't know anybody currently working on this. (Any volunteers?) If and when such an effort starts, maybe some parts of the existing code would be useful to look at. Erik From roland.mainz@nrubsig.org Thu May 31 16:06:13 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4VN6CrK000339 for ; Thu, 31 May 2007 16:06:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l4VN4efQ010238; Fri, 1 Jun 2007 07:04:45 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JIX0070HHFSPN00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 31 May 2007 17:04:40 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-3.sun.com ([192.18.43.21]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JIX003P9HFSNAA0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 31 May 2007 17:04:40 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay22.sun.com (relay22.sun.com [192.12.251.34] (may be forged)) by sca-ea-mail-3.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l4VN4dF2022400; Thu, 31 May 2007 23:04:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms25es.sun.com ([150.143.232.94] [150.143.232.94]) by relay22.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-462654; Thu, 31 May 2007 23:04:39 +0000 (Z) Received: from mms25bas.mms.us.syntegra.com (ip192-12-251-90.block6.us.syntegra.com [192.12.251.90]) by mms25es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-260670; Thu, 31 May 2007 23:04:39 +0000 (Z) Received: from mail-in-01.arcor-online.net ([151.189.21.41] [151.189.21.41]) by relay21.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-69043; Thu, 31 May 2007 23:04:39 +0000 (Z) Received: from mail-in-01-z2.arcor-online.net (mail-in-09-z2.arcor-online.net [151.189.8.21]) by mail-in-01.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C8B315B871; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 01:04:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-in-02.arcor-online.net (mail-in-02.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.42]) by mail-in-01-z2.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DD6528EC87; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 01:04:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from jupiterb48.nrubsig.org (dslb-084-058-231-111.pools.arcor-ip.net [84.58.231.111]) by mail-in-02.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFD4F36E868; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 01:04:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from nrubsig.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jupiterb48.nrubsig.org (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4VN4Y9S001443; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 01:04:35 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2007 01:04:34 +0200 From: Roland Mainz Subject: Re: [clearview-discuss] Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP Sender: gisburn@jupiterb48.nrubsig.org To: Erik Nordmark Cc: Nicolas Williams , psarc-ext@sun.com, clearview-discuss , Sebastien Roy Message-id: <465F5482.A0AEFA8F@nrubsig.org> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.11 sun4u) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <465F29E8.4050605@sun.com> <20070531204428.GF27420@Sun.COM> <465F4CCD.2050809@sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 1183 Erik Nordmark wrote: > Nicolas Williams wrote: > > I understand that the original customer for this never used it and that > > parts of Solaris' Mobile IP support are broken. But, are there really > > no real or potential users of / uses for mobile IP in Solaris? > > It isn't just that it is untested hence potentially broken; it was > incomplete by design (with the customer in question signing up to > providing certain components to complete what they needed.) > > I think having complete Mobile IPv4 and IPv6 support in Solaris would be > a good thing, but I don't know anybody currently working on this. (Any > volunteers?) If and when such an effort starts, maybe some parts of the > existing code would be useful to look at. Well, I would suggest to ignore IPv4 and only look at Mobile IPv6 support - AFAIK that may be less painfull (or better: Look ahead and create stuff for the future (=IPv6) instead of the past (=IPv4 (since noone used Mobile IPv4 support in Solaris anyway))) ... ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz@nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;) From casper@holland.sun.com Fri Jun 1 00:53:34 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l517rW1S019638 for ; Fri, 1 Jun 2007 00:53:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l517q4D4002049; Fri, 1 Jun 2007 15:52:07 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JIY007015UU5X00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 00:52:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sr1-eaft06-01.holland.sun.com ([129.159.237.36]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JIY00LFL5UT1FB0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 00:52:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from holland (room101 [129.159.130.93]) by sr1-eaft06-01.holland.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l517q4vT058148; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 09:52:04 +0200 (MEST) Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2007 09:52:04 +0200 From: Casper.Dik@Sun.COM Subject: Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP In-reply-to: <465F3B35.6060205@sun.com> Sender: casper@holland.sun.com To: Sebastien Roy Cc: Nicolas Williams , psarc-ext@Sun.COM, clearview-discuss Message-id: <200706010752.l517q4vT058148@sr1-eaft06-01.holland.sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <465F29E8.4050605@sun.com> <20070531204428.GF27420@Sun.COM> <465F3B35.6060205@sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 572 >Nicolas Williams wrote: >> I understand that the original customer for this never used it and that >> parts of Solaris' Mobile IP support are broken. But, are there really >> no real or potential users of / uses for mobile IP in Solaris? > >I can get you in touch with the people involved with scoping out this >technology area from the business side if you want to discuss the >business related conclusions that they reached. In short, a decision has >been made to remove this from Solaris. What if people in OpenSolaris pick this code up and fix it? Casper From brian.gupta@gmail.com Fri Jun 1 01:02:45 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5182iRb020786 for ; Fri, 1 Jun 2007 01:02:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l5181LFa011149 for <@newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Fri, 1 Jun 2007 09:01:23 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JIY0032P6AANC00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Fri, 01 Jun 2007 02:01:22 -0600 (MDT) Received: from brmea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.98.43]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JIY00G9R6A3JB40@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Fri, 01 Jun 2007 02:01:16 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay2.sun.com (relay2.sun.com [150.143.103.24] (may be forged)) by brmea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l517mLh9026083 for ; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 08:01:15 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms05es.sun.com ([150.143.104.94] [150.143.104.94]) by relay2.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-33174 for psarc-ext@sun.com; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 08:01:15 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay01i.sun.com (ip70.net150143-60.block3.us.syntegra.com [150.143.60.70]) by mms05es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1038744 for psarc-ext@sun.com; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 08:01:14 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay43i.sun.com ([192.5.209.74] [192.5.209.74]) by relay0i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-4507776 for psarc-ext@sun.com; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 08:01:14 +0000 (Z) Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.238] [66.249.82.238]) by relay4i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-4496248 for psarc-ext@sun.com; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 08:01:14 +0000 (Z) Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id i29so372486wxd for ; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 01:01:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.33.14 with SMTP id g14mr897565ang.1180684873937; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 01:01:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.3.13 with HTTP; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 01:01:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2007 04:01:13 -0400 From: Brian Gupta Subject: Re: [clearview-discuss] Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP In-reply-to: <200706010752.l517q4vT058148@sr1-eaft06-01.holland.sun.com> To: "Casper.Dik@sun.com" Cc: Sebastien Roy , psarc-ext@sun.com, clearview-discuss , Nicolas Williams Message-id: <5b5090780706010101mc656b1eg938dd33ff1395250@mail.gmail.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=iPpPBsipEZGb6SbDebv3MygN49nzbL+H9AKU1JKc8/HbmTkeDdB4NB6bsgZ1vUfx/44/q51EgMEgCuhcauMq5+P9WCKZI8Af7WHTk4TWqOwoQkdhflhWXW7e9Cy9q+0LOXs1rMLuStSy9Oi0DljGqK1ZZYomdX9H43k3kNiHLbg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=d5ttttl2EcZ7L1E7Xms6N2hLSHZ4PREMoRT01wy0fwPQdpQ5rNQDv6aLuKr8ce1d6PR8Gy3f03MUz8Fyq3NERe1hLLSrBNDmr5FzKjTX1YmgFTsBWVkY71iaMePqh/6mo4G+JtR7BNogMuUun/OOeQQxtCOumbUJ6mb2q1Uh+gw= X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <465F29E8.4050605@sun.com> <20070531204428.GF27420@Sun.COM> <465F3B35.6060205@sun.com> <200706010752.l517q4vT058148@sr1-eaft06-01.holland.sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 606 > What if people in OpenSolaris pick this code up and fix it? I'd imagine there would be nothing preventing them from fixing it, testing it and them proposing to reintegrate it. Remember the code will still exist in the repository if someone wants to pick this up down the road. My vote, is to strip out anything that is useless, and/or serves no planned/committed purpose. It just leads to code rot, that infects everything it touches. If you mean by this someone wants to pick this up right now, and fix and test it, and continue to maintain it, I think that would be a reason to reconsider. -Brian From Garrett.Damore@Sun.COM Fri Jun 1 01:29:17 2007 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l518THfN022920 for ; Fri, 1 Jun 2007 01:29:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l518Ru4K021883 for <@sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Fri, 1 Jun 2007 01:27:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JIY008057IKVP00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Fri, 01 Jun 2007 01:27:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.43.132]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JIY00LET7IK16F0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Fri, 01 Jun 2007 01:27:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-09.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l518RuGe019321 for ; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 01:27:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-09.sun.com by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JIY008017EY0N00@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> (original mail from Garrett.Damore@Sun.COM) for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Fri, 01 Jun 2007 01:27:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.251.21] ([76.174.83.55]) by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JIY005NR7IJFA10@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Fri, 01 Jun 2007 01:27:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2007 01:26:19 -0700 From: "Garrett D'Amore" Subject: Re: [clearview-discuss] Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP In-reply-to: <5b5090780706010101mc656b1eg938dd33ff1395250@mail.gmail.com> Sender: Garrett.Damore@Sun.COM To: Brian Gupta Cc: "Casper.Dik@sun.com" , Sebastien Roy , psarc-ext@Sun.COM, clearview-discuss , Nicolas Williams Message-id: <465FD82B.2020200@sun.com> Organization: Sun Microsystems MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <465F29E8.4050605@sun.com> <20070531204428.GF27420@Sun.COM> <465F3B35.6060205@sun.com> <200706010752.l517q4vT058148@sr1-eaft06-01.holland.sun.com> <5b5090780706010101mc656b1eg938dd33ff1395250@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0b2 (X11/20070227) Status: RO Content-Length: 1249 Brian Gupta wrote: >> What if people in OpenSolaris pick this code up and fix it? > > I'd imagine there would be nothing preventing them from fixing it, > testing it and them proposing to reintegrate it. > > Remember the code will still exist in the repository if someone wants > to pick this up down the road. > > My vote, is to strip out anything that is useless, and/or serves no > planned/committed purpose. It just leads to code rot, that infects > everything it touches. > > If you mean by this someone wants to pick this up right now, and fix > and test it, and continue to maintain it, I think that would be a > reason to reconsider. Actually, quite apart from bit-rot, there is one compelling reason to remove the code out _now_ if nobody is using. That is that this code inserts somethings on a few hotpaths that have a measurable negative impact on performance. Removing this code will improve the performance of IP forwarding in certain pathological cases (64-byte packets). If someone wants to pick up the project to redesign this, then he or she should have a chat with Erik and myself ... I think we have some ideas for how to implement something like this so that it does not penalize the hot code paths. -- Garrett From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Fri Jun 1 06:12:47 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l51DCkvL017710 for ; Fri, 1 Jun 2007 06:12:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l51DB8uV008861; Fri, 1 Jun 2007 14:11:20 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JIY00503KMWUU00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 06:11:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JIY0024NKMVN630@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 06:11:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l51DBIFf015783; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 09:11:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l51DBIep015780; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 09:11:18 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2007 09:11:18 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: [clearview-discuss] Re: 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP In-reply-to: <465FD82B.2020200@sun.com> To: "Garrett D'Amore" Cc: Brian Gupta , psarc-ext@sun.com, clearview-discuss , Sebastien Roy , Nicolas Williams , "Casper.Dik@sun.com" Message-id: <18016.6902.765648.792273@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <465F29E8.4050605@sun.com> <20070531204428.GF27420@Sun.COM> <465F3B35.6060205@sun.com> <200706010752.l517q4vT058148@sr1-eaft06-01.holland.sun.com> <5b5090780706010101mc656b1eg938dd33ff1395250@mail.gmail.com> <465FD82B.2020200@sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 1212 Garrett D'Amore writes: > Actually, quite apart from bit-rot, there is one compelling reason to > remove the code out _now_ if nobody is using. That is that this code > inserts somethings on a few hotpaths that have a measurable negative > impact on performance. Removing this code will improve the performance > of IP forwarding in certain pathological cases (64-byte packets). There's more than one such reason. The code also adds quite a few never-tested edge cases to the kernel. If we care about stability or security, that's not a good thing, as complexity is the enemy here. Also, every new project that touches those paths must (uselessly) consider how that functionality should evolve to support the new feature. Of course, there are other such invasive bits in the stack (CGTP, IPMP, TX, and Zones are good examples), but it's not as though we need more. I find those arguments more compelling than just how fast we can forward TCP ACKs and interactive TELNET. ;-} -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From Sebastien.Roy@sun.com Wed Jun 6 10:19:52 2007 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l56HJqTm013833 for ; Wed, 6 Jun 2007 10:19:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l56HIPRf007862 for <@newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 6 Jun 2007 10:18:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JJ80070L5EP3U00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 06 Jun 2007 11:18:25 -0600 (MDT) Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.98.31]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JJ800IZ05EPG7E0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 06 Jun 2007 11:18:25 -0600 (MDT) Received: from fe-amer-01.sun.com ([192.18.108.175]) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l56HIPlL006090 for ; Wed, 06 Jun 2007 17:18:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JJ8000015D6MT00@mail-amer.sun.com> (original mail from Sebastien.Roy@Sun.COM) for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 06 Jun 2007 11:18:25 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [129.148.174.103] by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JJ800I485ELT7I6@mail-amer.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 06 Jun 2007 11:18:21 -0600 (MDT) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2007 13:18:04 -0400 From: Sebastien Roy Subject: Re: [clearview-discuss] 2007/311 EOF of Mobile IP In-reply-to: <465F29E8.4050605@sun.com> Sender: Sebastien.Roy@sun.com To: Sebastien Roy Cc: psarc-ext@sun.com, clearview-discuss Message-id: <4666EC4C.5020704@sun.com> Organization: Sun Microsystems MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <465F29E8.4050605@sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070508) Status: RO Content-Length: 53 This case was approved during today's PSARC meeting.