IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] [v6ops] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-link-dhc-v6only-01.txt

Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> Fri, 13 December 2019 01:13 UTC

Return-Path: <lorenzo@google.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC9B21202DD for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 17:13:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -17.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com
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 iTWLjMLoIdmn for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 17:13:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-il1-x135.google.com (mail-il1-x135.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::135]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 570091200FB for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 17:13:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-il1-x135.google.com with SMTP id h15so268579ile.4 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 17:13:43 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=zK8GbS1ZYgEdhm1q7JlC1t5T7T2P+Hu+Ox30BIXaHho=; b=r2cdwOWfdFBvY75MzJsll5Cqn2tvWa5a+2MFNjQo7v+VxaZ+02JIecTWoc7Qt+PNqO 943pnRncCvozTZup6Kwmz05w0D3ETxYrD5Qq7yWuFzRAlWYAAyTtZ81YvRd7uc1TYKQL QSHjLyCS3dIgKL34ECRd+JCL4dehfN14ahxmA3dH4C/YpCUGfX7qK2npUHAf7bvKHULF Vx1KBS1JC/Vuowt/qwjUAy/17qn3YFpsGprrrgTzs2EsEoj7qh2ILsy0lHjzXgPIPAuW N4ABPYMngeZ8TjA3paiPDxPFDQLjHNs66GjFJO8zBHJnIPNP6dMP/phuDqaNoLVs8noA BuCg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=zK8GbS1ZYgEdhm1q7JlC1t5T7T2P+Hu+Ox30BIXaHho=; b=VvfZD2ePzHNkblUJUJ69mmq88HQmo/h0J5hYpxnx7eY0XvaePUBDKfTT4w7kAMxRgk 9k61OQrqKR6cUg08wXDJC4LkASpfrjAKzWBDB04a7YzsYQuutPYmL/vNsDGpJAGCqP1v f/2AaXUQpgmuLi1j9zs6er9kYNUV6LPzd+3rY6bGnUb844GMIrdyu1EQF7DX0gXkiM9T ybVQpE5z3spSyhyDXTZOLYmjQj1pdESCxrsyZXtjZ7hmAX6lJoEkkU7YiA1YouigD1fp 53qTvuh9FEmklS/xX+odnIkmP1k9N1T8Tv1ux1axM38n5LDaYhzi5+9iKWE72HIE9DXT 9aKA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXADoFCiUQQ5+MzlhZ9adeMAd1Xd/f1WLGeOAMGKGXHcbKDBRHp kxbJlF+9YTT5+eV0JjyH2RzIbbE+89GDp0ThbJgBtUCG
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw9LOZDiZ7Y01JbwZKqi8mUi4vZT6sN3suOgxQm1gAzV/SUZIEGOr6pZ4fDLUzqmYH82arndQbdIn4z0cj3Tso=
X-Received: by 2002:a92:6e09:: with SMTP id j9mr11209723ilc.178.1576199622308; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 17:13:42 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <DM6PR11MB413778A43012050E9CB0502BCF550@DM6PR11MB4137.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <C81ACD24-32DC-4114-80A7-81C3DDF66E1E@fugue.com> <CAKD1Yr32MDu0aH3Pxc2OKRtUnj03DwsagwbW43heZRjW3Xy7kg@mail.gmail.com> <cf17f63d-f9ad-d9d8-e0b7-8272d78db8fd@marples.name>
In-Reply-To: <cf17f63d-f9ad-d9d8-e0b7-8272d78db8fd@marples.name>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2019 10:13:30 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKD1Yr2dVZY4eMAfa9vCfiU4QpjtPD=p0fcVtjODVFXHFcs2Xw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Roy Marples <roy=40marples.name@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>, "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>, "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000095a53a05998b924e"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/4tt67j15yt3XAacxplbzQffoFNw>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] [v6ops] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-link-dhc-v6only-01.txt
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dhcwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2019 01:13:45 -0000

On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 9:54 AM Roy Marples <roy=
40marples.name@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

> > attempt to ignore it and proceed anyway, but it's a tradeoff. Saying
> > that yiaddr SHOULD or MUST be 0.0.0.0 creates incompatibility problems
> > and complicates server implementation. What do we gain by doing so? Why
> > can't we just say that the server MAY return 0.0.0.0, and if it does so,
> > the client MUST NOT request 0.0.0.0 but must instead assume that that
> > server has nothing to offer?
>
> A better wording would be the server SHOULD return 0.0.0.0 but the
> client MUST ignore the actual value - the server has nothing to offer
> for the address.


I really don't see why returning a fake address is preferable. A real
address is easier for many servers to return, and is more compatible with
middleboxes. It also has the advantage that if a client changes its mind
(maybe it has in the meantime found out that there is no IPv6 on the link?)
it can request it and get it - and again, this all works today because
returning real addresses is, in general, what DHCP does. :-)

What is the advantage of returning a fake address?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email