On 7/8/19 16:30, Joe Touch wrote: > Things that don’t work aren’t always either deprecated or security attacks. > > And if we treat them as such, the remainder won’t be useful to anyone for > anything.
What I meant is that, whether one likes it or not, at the point something does not work (for some meaningful level of failure rate), you cannot rely on it anymore. (that wrt the "deprecated" (in a colloquial way) bit). Regarding security, there are times in which things don't work because vendors did such a poor job that supporting a given feature opens your networks or devices to attack. Particularly when a feature is not widely employed (if at all), it's not surprising that ops people resort to blocking the feature. Not that I necessarily like it, but that's what reality seems to indicate. I leave the "who to blame" for others (SDOs for generating stuff that is not possible to implement in a meaningful way, vendors for claiming they support something when they do it in a very poorly way, or ops folks for solving their problems with what they have at hand (instead of e.g. to applying pain to vendors or SDOs, if at all possible)). :-) -- Fernando Gont e-mail: [email protected] || [email protected] PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1 _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
