* Blake Dunlap iki...@gmail.com [2014-05-08 03:19]:
Except for that whole mac address thing, that crashes networks...
this lie doesn't get any more true by repeating them over and over.
--
Henning Brauer, h...@bsws.de, henn...@openbsd.org
BS Web Services GmbH, AG Hamburg HRB 128289,
* Robert Drake rdr...@direcpath.com [2014-05-08 06:02]:
On 5/7/2014 9:47 PM, Rob Seastrom wrote:
Now, the bar for an informational RFC is pretty low. Especially for people
who have written them before. Those people seem to think one is needed in
this case so they might want to get started
* Owen DeLong o...@delong.com [2014-05-08 07:16]:
If they take their ball and go home, that's fine. The problem is that they
seem to occasionally have their ball brought (by systems administrators) to
networks where the network engineers are already running VRRP on routers (for
example) and
* Owen DeLong o...@delong.com [2014-05-08 04:36]:
I don’t believe for one second that the IESG refused to deal with ‘em.
you're free to believe whatever you want and ignore facts.
I do believe the IESG did not hand them everything they wanted on a
silver platter in contravention of the
* Gary Buhrmaster gary.buhrmas...@gmail.com [2014-05-08 00:43]:
But (presuming no adjustments) the patent is now expired,
and the OpenBSD team could now release CARPv2 (or
whatever they decide to call it) which would implement the
standard, should they wish to work and play well with the
If OBSD can't afford MAC addresses but does not object to them in principle, I
can give forever IRU for 256 MAC addresses to OBSD for 0USD one-time fee.
--
++ytti
* Eygene Ryabinkin r...@grid.kiae.ru [2014-05-08 11:12]:
Henning,
Thu, May 08, 2014 at 09:35:00AM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote:
* Blake Dunlap iki...@gmail.com [2014-05-08 03:19]:
Except for that whole mac address thing, that crashes networks...
this lie doesn't get any more true by
* Saku Ytti s...@ytti.fi [2014-05-08 12:14]:
If OBSD can't afford MAC addresses but does not object to them in principle, I
can give forever IRU for 256 MAC addresses to OBSD for 0USD one-time fee.
congratulations, that is far ahead of just whining.
when/if we change the mac addrs, the new
On 08/05/2014 11:25, Henning Brauer wrote:
you shouldn't see issues but log spam.
maybe you misunderstand the problem. If you have vrrp and carp on the same
vlan, using the same vrrp group ID as VHID, then each virtual IP will arp
for the same mac address on that vlan.
This messes up the
* Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org [2014-05-08 13:03]:
On 08/05/2014 11:25, Henning Brauer wrote:
you shouldn't see issues but log spam.
maybe you misunderstand the problem. If you have vrrp and carp on the same
vlan, using the same vrrp group ID as VHID, then each virtual IP will arp
for the
On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 12:31:23PM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote:
* Saku Ytti s...@ytti.fi [2014-05-08 12:14]:
If OBSD can't afford MAC addresses but does not object to them in
principle, I
can give forever IRU for 256 MAC addresses to OBSD for 0USD one-time fee.
when/if we change the mac
On 08/05/2014 12:09, Henning Brauer wrote:
my switches seem to deal with that, wether they have special handling
for that mac addr range or not i dunno.
I've seen this problem cause downtime on production networks.
fyi, it will probably work fine on hubs, but not on switches.
again, stress
And that's why C. should use a more appropriate example to defend
his position.
By this thread, I suspect, that whoever dealt with those different
organization for OpenBSD CARP, lacked the skills to accomplish the
task and got shut down for being an ass.
PS:
Being of the
On 8/05/2014, at 11:09 pm, Henning Brauer hb-na...@bsws.de wrote:
* Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org [2014-05-08 13:03]:
On 08/05/2014 11:25, Henning Brauer wrote:
you shouldn't see issues but log spam.
maybe you misunderstand the problem. If you have vrrp and carp on the same
vlan, using
On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 09:48:26AM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote:
awaiting your diff.
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-techm=139955603603070w=2
Kind regards,
Job
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 3:49 AM, Henning Brauer hb-na...@bsws.de wrote:
* Owen DeLong o...@delong.com [2014-05-08 04:36]:
I don’t believe for one second that the IESG refused to deal with ‘em.
you're free to believe whatever you want and ignore facts.
I do believe the IESG did not hand
* Bill Fenner fen...@gmail.com [2014-05-08 20:41]:
I was the IESG member responsible for the VRRP working group when the
OpenBSD developer (I'm sorry, Henning, I forget if it was you or someone
else)
wasn't me, as stated repeatedly I wasn't the one talking to the
standard bodies.
came to a
I think we have told what happened in enough detail in the 3.5
^your version of
commentary already posted to this thread.
randy, yet another of the hordes of vrrp users
* David Conrad d...@virtualized.org [2014-05-07 00:21]:
The fact that OpenBSD developers continue to defend this choice is
one reason why I won't run OpenBSD (or CARP).
We won't miss you.
And besides, you're running plenty of our code every day. It's probaby
in your pocket right now.
Any
* Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net [2014-05-07 03:54]:
That the BSD community sometimes doesn't play well with others
Translation: not bowing for corporate US america.
Quite proudly so.
certainly won't fess up when they make a mistake
wrong. I have no problem admitting mistakes. And that's
Constantine,
Tue, May 06, 2014 at 06:11:04PM -0700, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
On 6 May 2014 15:17, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote:
Except it wasn't useless: it was, in fact, in use by VRRP.
Further, the OpenBSD developers chose to squat on 240 for pfsync -
a number that has
Eygene Ryabinkin rea+na...@grid.kiae.ru writes:
If you hadn't seen the cases when same VRIDs in the same network were
used for both VRRP and CARP doesn't mean that they aren't occurring in
the real world. We use CARP and VRRP quite extensively and when we
first were hit by this issue, it
The issue Jared is needing a consensus in a community where that may be
impossible to achieve because of differing agendas - so does that mean
that the protocol should not exist because the IETF would not grant it
credence? Interesting.
Todd
On 5/6/2014 6:51 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
On May 6,
Hi,
TGLASSEY wrote:
The issue Jared is needing a consensus in a community where that may be
impossible to achieve because of differing agendas - so does that mean
that the protocol should not exist because the IETF would not grant it
credence? Interesting.
There are just 256 numbers
Todd,
On May 7, 2014, at 4:44 PM, TGLASSEY tglas...@earthlink.net wrote:
The issue Jared is needing a consensus in a community where that may be
impossible to achieve because of differing agendas - so does that mean that
the protocol should not exist because the IETF would not grant it
On May 6, 2014, at 23:44 , Henning Brauer hb-na...@bsws.de wrote:
* Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net [2014-05-07 03:54]:
That the BSD community sometimes doesn't play well with others
Translation: not bowing for corporate US america.
Quite proudly so.
Uh, no, Translation: Self appointed
CARP uses a VRRP version number that has not been defined by VRRP,
hence there is no conflict there, either. The link from the quote
above has a quote from Henning.
Which means that in addition to squatting on the VRRP port, they are also
squatting on a version number that I'm betting the
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 5:18 PM, Rob Seastrom r...@seastrom.com wrote:
Eygene Ryabinkin rea+na...@grid.kiae.ru writes:
If you hadn't seen the cases when same VRIDs in the same network were
used for both VRRP and CARP doesn't mean that they aren't occurring in
the real world. We use CARP and
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 05:57:01PM -0400, David Conrad wrote:
However, assume that the OpenBSD developers did document their protocol
and requested an IESG action and was refused. Do you believe that would
justify squatting on an already assigned number?
I'm going to go with yes, just to be
On 7 May 2014 15:09, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
CARP uses a VRRP version number that has not been defined by VRRP,
hence there is no conflict there, either. The link from the quote
above has a quote from Henning.
Which means that in addition to squatting on the VRRP port,
VRRP
On Wed, 07 May 2014 17:10:32 -0700, Constantine A. Murenin said:
Also, would you please be so kind as to finally explain to us why
Google can squat on the https port with SPDY,
Because it doesn't squat on the port. It politely asks Do you speak SPDY,
or just https? and then listens to what
On 7 May 2014 17:56, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 17:10:32 -0700, Constantine A. Murenin said:
Also, would you please be so kind as to finally explain to us why
Google can squat on the https port with SPDY,
Because it doesn't squat on the port. It politely asks Do you
Except for that whole mac address thing, that crashes networks...
-Blake
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 8:03 PM, Constantine A. Murenin
muren...@gmail.com wrote:
On 7 May 2014 17:56, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Wed, 07 May 2014 17:10:32 -0700, Constantine A. Murenin said:
Also, would you
On May 7, 2014, at 12:36 AM, Eygene Ryabinkin rea+na...@grid.kiae.ru wrote:
VRRP/HSRP comes from Cisco (well, VRRP is RFC'ed for some time, but
its origin is Cisco too),
I’m sorry, but this is 100% incorrect.
HSRP comes from Cisco, but Cisco originally decided to not release the protocol
This CARP thing is the best troll I've seen yet. Over a decade old and people
are still on about it.
-Laszlo
On May 8, 2014, at 1:15 AM, Blake Dunlap iki...@gmail.com wrote:
Except for that whole mac address thing, that crashes networks...
-Blake
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 8:03 PM,
Matt Palmer mpal...@hezmatt.org writes:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 05:57:01PM -0400, David Conrad wrote:
However, assume that the OpenBSD developers did document their protocol
and requested an IESG action and was refused. Do you believe that would
justify squatting on an already assigned
Notwithstanding any legitimate or illegitimate grievance associated with
the sordid history of carp / vrrp / the us patent system / BSD forks
and their respective participants.
It's time to take a long weekend.
thanks
joel
On 5/7/14, 8:47 PM, Rob Seastrom wrote:
Matt Palmer
On May 7, 2014, at 4:19 PM, Matt Palmer mpal...@hezmatt.org wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 05:57:01PM -0400, David Conrad wrote:
However, assume that the OpenBSD developers did document their protocol
and requested an IESG action and was refused. Do you believe that would
justify squatting
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 07:33:45PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
On May 7, 2014, at 4:19 PM, Matt Palmer mpal...@hezmatt.org wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 05:57:01PM -0400, David Conrad wrote:
However, assume that the OpenBSD developers did document their protocol
and requested an IESG action
On 5/7/2014 9:47 PM, Rob Seastrom wrote:
The bar for an informational RFC is pretty darned low. I don't see
anything in the datagram nature of i'm alive, don't pull the trigger
yet that would preclude a UDP packet rather than naked IP. Hell,
since it's not supposed to leave the LAN, one could
On May 7, 2014, at 20:58 , Robert Drake rdr...@direcpath.com wrote:
On 5/7/2014 9:47 PM, Rob Seastrom wrote:
The bar for an informational RFC is pretty darned low. I don't see
anything in the datagram nature of i'm alive, don't pull the trigger
yet that would preclude a UDP packet rather
* Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org [2014-04-26 22:56]:
the situation was created by the openbsd team, not the ieee, the ietf or
iana.
that's nothing short of a lie.
The openbsd foundation raised $153,000 this year. Why not invest $2500 of
this and fix the problem?
good luck finding another
On Tue, 06 May 2014 09:22:37 +0200, Henning Brauer said:
* Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org [2014-04-26 22:56]:
the situation was created by the openbsd team, not the ieee, the ietf or
iana.
that's nothing short of a lie.
Umm.. remind me who chose the conflicting value and shipped product
On Apr 26, 2014, at 1:55 PM, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote:
the situation was created by the openbsd team, not the ieee, the ietf or
iana. You squatted on an existing oui assignment used by an equivalent
protocol and in doing this, you created a long term problem with no
possible
On 6 May 2014 07:56, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 09:22:37 +0200, Henning Brauer said:
* Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org [2014-04-26 22:56]:
the situation was created by the openbsd team, not the ieee, the ietf or
iana.
that's nothing short of a lie.
Umm.. remind me
Constantine,
On May 6, 2014, at 11:54 AM, Constantine A. Murenin muren...@gmail.com wrote:
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
On 6 May 2014 12:31, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote:
Constantine,
On May 6, 2014, at 11:54 AM, Constantine A. Murenin muren...@gmail.com
wrote:
As a final note of course, when we petitioned IANA, the IETF body
regulating official internet protocol numbers, to give us numbers for
Constantine,
On May 6, 2014, at 4:15 PM, Constantine A. Murenin muren...@gmail.com wrote:
Protocol 112 was assigned by IANA for VRRP in 1998.
When did OpenBSD choose to squat on 112?
If you don't use it, you lose it.
Are you suggesting no one is running VRRP? Surprising given RFC 5798.
On 6 May 2014 15:17, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote:
Constantine,
On May 6, 2014, at 4:15 PM, Constantine A. Murenin muren...@gmail.com wrote:
Protocol 112 was assigned by IANA for VRRP in 1998.
When did OpenBSD choose to squat on 112?
If you don't use it, you lose it.
Are you
On May 6, 2014, at 9:11 PM, Constantine A. Murenin muren...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6 May 2014 15:17, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote:
Constantine,
On May 6, 2014, at 4:15 PM, Constantine A. Murenin muren...@gmail.com
wrote:
Protocol 112 was assigned by IANA for VRRP in 1998.
When
On 6 May 2014 18:51, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
On May 6, 2014, at 9:11 PM, Constantine A. Murenin muren...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6 May 2014 15:17, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote:
Constantine,
On May 6, 2014, at 4:15 PM, Constantine A. Murenin muren...@gmail.com
So, then the only problem, perhaps, is that noone has apparently
bothered to explicitly document that both VRRP and CARP use
00:00:5e:00:01:xx MAC addresses, and that the xx part comes from the
Virtual Router IDentifier (VRID) in VRRP and virtual host ID
(VHID) in CARP, providing a colliding
Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
Your point being?
That the BSD community sometimes doesn't play well with others,
and certainly won't fess up when they make a mistake and cause
collateral damage.
The BSD community is larger than OpenBSD, and larger than Theo's
ego, much to said
On 23/04/2014 17:47, Henning Brauer wrote:
fortunately this obviously isn't a big problem in practice, based on
the fact that we don't get any complaints/reports in that direction.
still would be way micer if that situation had been created in the
first place, but as said - we weren't given
* Donald Eastlake d3e...@gmail.com [2014-04-23 21:46]:
The process for applying
for MAC addresses under the IANA OUI was regularized in RFC 5342,
since updated to and replaced by RFC 7042. See
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7042.txt. Perhaps you were trying
before RFC 5342?
very possible.
* Paul WALL pauldotw...@gmail.com [2014-04-22 19:30]:
Both CARP and VRRP use virtual router MAC addresses that start with
00:00:5e. This organizational unique identifier (OUI) is assigned to
IANA, not OpenBSD or a related project. The CARP authors could have
gotten their own from IEEE. OUIs
Henning I understand your work is important - and that its open source
but that is part of the problem with global patent law today. No one
wants it around when their works are impacted by it. But patent
publications are binding under the treaties and in fact CARP clearly is
an infringement.
* TGLASSEY tglas...@earthlink.net [2014-04-23 19:13]:
in fact CARP clearly is an infringement [of the patent].
that's YOUR analysis, and it contradicts ours and the legal advice we
got, so I'll ignore it.
Irrelevant anyway, see subject - expired.
--
Henning Brauer, h...@bsws.de,
Hi,
See below
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Henning Brauer hb-na...@bsws.de wrote:
* Paul WALL pauldotw...@gmail.com [2014-04-22 19:30]:
Both CARP and VRRP use virtual router MAC addresses that start with
00:00:5e. This organizational unique identifier (OUI) is assigned to
IANA, not
* Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org [2014-04-22 10:29]:
... turns 20 today.
This is the patent which covers hsrp, vrrp, many applications of carp and
some other vendor-specific standby protocols.
it does NOT cover carp, not at all. carp was carefully designed to
specifically avoid that.
--
On 22/04/2014 12:31, Henning Brauer wrote:
it does NOT cover carp, not at all.
that is a political statement rather than a legal opinion. If you read the
patent, it's pretty obvious that when you have a group of carp-enabled
devices providing a stable gateway IP address, and these devices are
On Tuesday, April 22, 2014, Henning Brauer hb-na...@bsws.de wrote:
* Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org javascript:; [2014-04-22 10:29]:
... turns 20 today.
This is the patent which covers hsrp, vrrp, many applications of carp and
some other vendor-specific standby protocols.
it does NOT
* Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org [2014-04-22 15:33]:
On 22/04/2014 12:31, Henning Brauer wrote:
it does NOT cover carp, not at all.
that is a political statement rather than a legal opinion. If you read the
patent, it's pretty obvious that when you have a group of carp-enabled
devices
I won't waste time on your uninformed ramblings, you have the facts
plain wrong. There is enough material on the net for everybody to read
up on what happened.
carp causing outages however is nothing short of a lie. carp
announces itself as vrrp version 3. anything trying to parse it as
vrrp2
* Ryan Shea ryans...@google.com [2014-04-22 16:24]:
along with OpenNTPd, OpenBGPd - which
probably have similar standards non-compliance
I wrote both of them, they are as standards compliant as it gets.
we would have implemented vrrp if it hadn't been patent encumbered.
in the end, that was
On Tuesday, April 22, 2014, Henning Brauer hb-na...@bsws.de wrote:
I won't waste time on your uninformed ramblings, you have the facts
plain wrong. There is enough material on the net for everybody to read
up on what happened.
carp causing outages however is nothing short of a lie. carp
On 04/22/2014 01:30 PM, Paul WALL wrote:
On Tuesday, April 22, 2014, Henning Brauer hb-na...@bsws.de wrote:
I won't waste time on your uninformed ramblings, you have the facts
plain wrong. There is enough material on the net for everybody to read
up on what happened.
carp causing outages
Imitation is the highest form of flattery. ;)
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
Original message
From: Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com
Date: 04/22/2014 11:48 AM (GMT-07:00)
To: Paul WALL pauldotw...@gmail.com
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: US patent 5473599
On 04/22
68 matches
Mail list logo
