[6lo] 6lo-ap-nd comments, ... misconfiguration/typo comment from remote
Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Thu, 07 April 2016 22:09 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 87E3512D748 for <6lo@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 15:09:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.911
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.911 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sOHaEL0jovB8 for <6lo@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 15:09:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C411B12D72A for <6lo@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 15:09:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A0092009E; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 18:12:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5CB263755; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 18:09:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Pascal Thubert <pthubert@cisco.com>, 6lo@ietf.org
X-Attribution: mcr
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6+dev; GNU Emacs 24.4.2
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-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2016 18:09:04 -0400
Message-ID: <9994.1460066944@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6lo/KoNQUlYMUFvbsud7ayj4tIwU7nE>
Subject: [6lo] 6lo-ap-nd comments, ... misconfiguration/typo comment from remote
X-BeenThere: 6lo@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Thu, 07 Apr 2016 22:09:07 -0000
The major protection that this kind of thing provides is for when the network operator makes a *typo* installing some new piece of equipment that for some reason, has a static IPv6. [Not a typo on your slide..!] NMS/NOC equipement is likely to have a static address, and a DNS name, etc. IP address allocation in non-IT operators is always a pain in the ass, which is why we have all the RAs, and autoconfiguration, etc... But, also given backbone-router, we expect to have ethernet attached devices visible to the LLN, and some of those will be PCs, and open ethernet switches, and the wrong stuff will get plugged. (Hey, I did it two weeks ago: duplicated a VM, then updated the IP addresses, and uped the interfaces, but failed to clear *all* the OLD v4 addresses like a reboot would have done. Took me three days to figure out why one guy couldn't ask that server; because I could just fine on IPv6, and whenever the new machine won the ARP race...) -- Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
- [6lo] 6lo-ap-nd comments, ... misconfiguration/ty… Michael Richardson