carping about CARP

Fri Nov 30 08:59:50 UTC 2012

On 30/11/2012, Robert E. Seastrom <rs at seastrom.com> wrote:
> [*] The OpenBSD side of the story can be read at
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Address_Redundancy_Protocol#No_official_Internet_protocol_number
>
> Seems that there is a lesson to be learned here:
>
> "o hai, we wrote this software but can not be bothered to follow your
> process or formally write up the protocol, plz to be giving us a
> protocol number" ain't gonna fly.
>
>
>

This tells me pretty much everything I need to know about this:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/19/

Theo's comments in context here:
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=133832434412686&w=2

The article in question:
http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=2090149
I recommend reading the comments.

>From where I stand, the OpenBSD project has been consistent on
insulating itself against future legal issues, no matter how remote,
with the idea that your security should not be restrained by anyone
other than you.
I believe that idea has legs regardless of practical considerations
and stands on it's own.

Besides, I won't discount OpenBSD out of hand for forging ahead,
withstanding practical issues, considering the runs they've got on the
board and the many facepalm fails we see in the diametrically opposed
corporate world.
It might be a very good thing they've bothered to take the time on this.

Best wishes.