IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Anima] Whether IPv6 only for ACP? //RE: I-D Action: draft-behringer-anima-autonomic-addressing-01.txt

Duzongpeng <duzongpeng@huawei.com> Sat, 27 June 2015 02:31 UTC

Return-Path: <duzongpeng@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CC391B2B42 for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 19:31:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 rOxsluQSeVtt for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 19:31:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85DFF1B2C6D for <anima@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 19:31:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml403-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BYA88385; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 02:31:16 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from nkgeml409-hub.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.40) by lhreml403-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.217) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 03:31:15 +0100
Received: from NKGEML505-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.218]) by nkgeml409-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.40]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 10:31:09 +0800
From: Duzongpeng <duzongpeng@huawei.com>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, Anima WG <anima@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Anima] Whether IPv6 only for ACP? //RE: I-D Action: draft-behringer-anima-autonomic-addressing-01.txt
Thread-Index: AQHQrxkRDomOGjtUGEW0YQrF2SXEn5284BqA//+3fICAAVp9gIAAqqcAgAEGqJA=
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 02:31:09 +0000
Message-ID: <BAFEC9523F57BC48A51C20226A5589575E9322A3@nkgeml505-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <bccb22c0965b4828b52221c73eacf49e52eeb8c3@webmail.hansfords.net> <32262.1435344434@sandelman.ca>
In-Reply-To: <32262.1435344434@sandelman.ca>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.111.149.226]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/n7h340jTuV5mfCpBVifHDMy3FRU>
Subject: Re: [Anima] Whether IPv6 only for ACP? //RE: I-D Action: draft-behringer-anima-autonomic-addressing-01.txt
X-BeenThere: anima@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach <anima.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/anima/>
List-Post: <mailto:anima@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 02:31:20 -0000

Hi Michael Richardson,

Just ensure there is no misunderstanding here. IMO, the ACP is mostly software based. 
Of course, normally only new products can provide that feature.

Best regards
Zongpeng Du

-----Original Message-----
From: Anima [mailto:anima-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Michael Richardson
Sent: Saturday, June 27, 2015 2:47 AM
To: Anima WG
Subject: Re: [Anima] Whether IPv6 only for ACP? //RE: I-D Action: draft-behringer-anima-autonomic-addressing-01.txt


Jonathan Hansford <jonathan@hansfords.net> wrote:
    > There are some systems outside the Internet that have no urgent need
    > to move to IPv6 and developers would rather focus on more urgent
    > needs. Autonomic networking could well be one of those more urgent
    > needs.

The Autonomic Control Plane is *not* IPv6. It just looks like IPv6.

It's a new fangled protocol that has nothing to do with any of the deployed production network.  As such, it is *ENTIRELY* greenfield.
It's all new code.   It likely doesn't even get forwarded using whatever
ASICs your hardware might have...

If someone wants to do this with something that looks like IPv4, that's fine, but I want nobody complaining if we specify a mechanism (such as ULAs or ND or SEND) that does never been defined in the thing that looks like IPv4.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works  -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email