IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [6lo] towards adoption of draft-thubert-6lo-prefix-registration

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 24 May 2023 11:35 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: 6lo@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6lo@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7EC2C151B3E for <6lo@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 May 2023 04:35:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sandelman.ca
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EyNmGjkKN17y for <6lo@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 May 2023 04:34:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 96487C151546 for <6lo@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 May 2023 04:34:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id B85BE3898C; Wed, 24 May 2023 07:34:58 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id kmBBGGsHfyuz; Wed, 24 May 2023 07:34:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (unknown [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2:40a:34ff:fe10:f571]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1637C3898B; Wed, 24 May 2023 07:34:57 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sandelman.ca; s=mail; t=1684928097; bh=vtI4hRMKZcl4Q9PYlqzdkGPIGSlZS2yrwHpaKmGuVCI=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=L9ljql32L3QfemDjUF8xAhZFw/+hfgPON5ae9oWqoq275d5JS03D2i4t97VCyMBFe wLsaLW2LP6Z022nY2przi19WXMInPiErydQQ/ooSwZlyS4/CrMsAbcrlGJ+KQCYvMt 8Nv95tTitG3VolmBpijr/fXUXm5RRjaZN2z7udHRtkuSUrqfWSqmS7aY7SxQUwu4Na w9z/7Dl0dNwEcqzldBse3vplerwreFuuur3aupdRQTZIKe/DU8VAvJ1cTwKvL24S7V sSXZQEt+b7o94D/CaGKlgtKxkjBsNCgExPfnWGXxERartP8eFKTXWeuydd/SSnDwJD 9M197Dt4+oKpA==
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2989E5; Wed, 24 May 2023 07:34:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, "6lo@ietf.org" <6lo@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CO1PR11MB4881FA76288CEBA3C27FF7A8D8419@CO1PR11MB4881.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CO1PR11MB4881FA76288CEBA3C27FF7A8D8419@CO1PR11MB4881.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 27.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 24 May 2023 07:34:56 -0400
Message-ID: <20164.1684928096@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6lo/HiQcCd581xVuEMr23o6vIS5g3ag>
Subject: Re: [6lo] towards adoption of draft-thubert-6lo-prefix-registration
X-BeenThere: 6lo@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list for the 6lo WG for Internet Area issues in IPv6 over constrained node networks." <6lo.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6lo>, <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/6lo/>
List-Post: <mailto:6lo@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo>, <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 May 2023 11:35:03 -0000

Pascal Thubert \(pthubert\) <pthubert=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
    > At the moment there is magic (read proprietary code) that ties, say,
    > the DHCP server that delegates a prefix and the routers that install a
    > route for the delegated prefix via the delegated node. With this draft,
    > the delegated node can advertise the prefix to the routers in a
    > standard/interoperable fashion.

Yes, the DHCP relay has to snoop the replies.
I've complained about this at DHCwg some years ago in the past, and been told
that vendors X,Y,Z already have snooping code, and it would take so long to
deploy new things, so what would be the point.

I disagree: had we done this ages ago, today, we would have working code.

    > Bottom line is that it is getting more urgent to complete the work and
    > I intend to ask for adoption at IETF 117.

    > To progress on this, reviews would be much appreciated between now and
    > the next IETF.

I agree that we need a specification. But, I think don't think either of the
documents you cited contain that what we need.
Or maybe, I have mis-understood.

(Waiting for Ole to say "OSPF"... and there are some arguments for doing it
this way, and it would be nice to figure out what's in the way here)

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email