Re: [addr-select-dt] slide to 6man presentation

Tim Chown <> Mon, 26 July 2010 15:27 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDF1A3A6900 for <>; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 08:27:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.436
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.436 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.162, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ixxe-j5-8vZ6 for <>; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 08:27:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A89F03A6857 for <>; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 08:27:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o6QFRcxO003153 for <>; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:27:38 +0100
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 o6QFRcxO003153
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple;; s=200903; t=1280158058; bh=h4M1IyrpIvXvnxj1EMzy9E4dJJs=; h=Subject:References:From:In-Reply-To:Date:To:Mime-Version; b=BIR3PBHv8Y9zxe2MCVlaJa0b5VAHIT1JMD8HraYgVNa/WP756N02TLKA58wjH+6iS 9Y9g12mOREXKFy9qYCD3tFB1hSGqABgi87Jy0d6Bp4TFagbNX3CvjGt/eBTEReOnH9 MdSoCESn4Rjp5hm3u58pGk+Diqi3xPsPj2qWc+nI=
Received: from ( [2001:630:d0:f102::25d]) by ( [2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) envelope-from <> with ESMTP id m6PGRc0540035920RA ret-id none; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:27:38 +0100
Received: from ( []) by (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o6QFRGqT019892 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for <>; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:27:36 +0100
References: <> <> <EMEW3|485ffd87b61ef2b40ca7f992939f6ae1m6PADp03tjc||> <> <>
From: Tim Chown <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-19--944338024
In-Reply-To: <>
Message-ID: <EMEW3|e29c7912d611da7177ebebdb00ee8464m6PGRc03tjc||>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:27:36 +0100
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081)
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081)
X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
X-smtpf-Report: sid=m6PGRc054003592000; tid=m6PGRc0540035920RA; client=relay,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=1:0; fails=0
X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: o6QFRcxO003153
Subject: Re: [addr-select-dt] slide to 6man presentation
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IPv6 Address Selection Design Team <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 15:27:22 -0000

On 26 Jul 2010, at 12:54, Arifumi Matsumoto wrote:

> However, we should not mention all the changes. To make it simple and easy to focus on the important points.

That's fine :)

>> - in dynamic/unmanaged networks using routing hints for address selection *may* be more appropriate
> I cannot get what exactly mean by this sentence.
> Do you assume a environment where a mobile node with multiple interface can make use of routing information for address selection ?

Or a node which has multiple addresses from the site being multi-homed, by using for example an ICMP query to an edge router or route server.

>> - the problem of handling policy conflict is a host issue, the method to distribute the policy is a network issue - we focus here on the network issue since the host issue is broadly applicable to many configuration parameters
> Important point.
> I knew that, but I could not find a space for that.
> Maybe we need to add some slides to elaborate.

Maybe add after slide 2 and push your policy conflict reference to the slide after that?    I think that would flow well.

>> - we should avoid delaying progression of a 3484 policy distribution method applicable to managed enterprise networks
> Not only enterprise networks, but for networks where multiple upstream networks can talk with each other.

Yes, sorry, I am biased of course :)

>> I think this material could fit in a new Slide 3 and then you continue the arifumi-6man-addr-select-conflict reference after that, to keep the flow.
>> I see a new Troan multihoming draft came out this morning, I've not checked what changes there are yet.
> The main changes are about the legacy host support. Support by using NAT66 to the wrongly source-addressed packets.

OK, thanks.