Re: [dhcwg] MTU option for DHCPv6?

Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> Fri, 29 July 2016 14:21 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 5E47912DBFD for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 07:21:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.987
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.987 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.287, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 DYK9De_baiOr for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 07:21:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io0-x22c.google.com (mail-io0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22c]) (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 E518E12D74C for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 07:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id q83so130364675iod.1 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 07:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=VWje2XYRbSYj2LNAy6nv6Y2CtKuj2r/aNpXA+iHFF1Q=; b=MpZtXwG16WjdYUjyjd1zHDO4jWB4r/rpbvnthABKP2YmnVowI6AMG10N4oY3kqG6GY V+vw2+vDA46SzvA9C8GIbG7hwADSAv7b9svcKZtHC9peEMMiNsw+pEwOcaDKu4bSgYol ROdHJjBFTCq3oEuMfh+mjlxTA6llIne5PGTrMu/eQYWJC4a/l85R1mIF0nDVeLNpM/2+ 0nMyAUumvjj9GPXS0Iw5rPmQmHZRyXxGUXJGr7N92lg/E+SC05CBdKuqScx28wuyUkwY i3wFYtj4KhdKYKC0pvdmNYGrB5YeJGx5yPMSZZqReFnugifYPJsxQMy58iQA415BKLPi +Kuw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=VWje2XYRbSYj2LNAy6nv6Y2CtKuj2r/aNpXA+iHFF1Q=; b=amFGnabGxMOpGF40CwElm+rJDOQKDMFVbDidGIOVhS3z6Hjdxkylv1dC2dsKZ4Tg6q 2e9zMsarBdQhrHF+wa8o3bH4Pqhjzb6/MqBcmPlgdgNYFr1lFiQHrN4lmNKECQPlOuJe P1AFWWlOxDrThjq1MMbf8+j1eZmmNEB66ukz23Vwv4jgx5XEPkxA0Wz5vPaKqt9vQf8M r7XWU8y74vkLFTJnya3td5Scqv6kn8jm/o2GV0cf5FPMBbIZy7gLPQoHpCxoTQ3C2yNl fMUYvhr8yezUk5VGg/61iJcEkubtRbV9fK4hEf8MSidC5vPx8946yBANepx9z664MsLn QGyQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoous8IsIHQ2aDnmesw2lTh04Nfj8KK1cIBAyf1UGBhoZRei7aPfzQRV0FSy3GOk1Gyh2RJLJ7Mlr+bsP9iFi4
X-Received: by 10.107.39.65 with SMTP id n62mr32102258ion.94.1469802060116; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 07:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.64.26.72 with HTTP; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 07:20:40 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <7d3a9eb3-cee3-d855-0bc6-0c397b29a963@gmail.com>
References: <8c706ad593cc403d9e738c7aafec8360@XCH15-05-05.nw.nos.boeing.com> <5671d2f3bf364bec9b70ab8cbb9cd2a9@XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com> <9db5a86d50314519b4fcc4589717f802@XCH15-05-05.nw.nos.boeing.com> <f98d75f73d224798a406084fdb4cdedc@XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com> <F22A046E-27FA-4EED-9699-70A6B3D49A66@gmx.com> <20AC7B4D-430C-4D56-8D5C-1E134AEEDA76@employees.org> <516a0ed770414d0095ca69905c3a83a3@XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com> <CAKD1Yr2nx_GeyZJ7YA3b1zktRUG-yvkRQKOVywzg0i7s=WTyaw@mail.gmail.com> <4725f6ba7bbf4b9ab5c4c23a04f41518@XCH15-05-05.nw.nos.boeing.com> <f72eede6-83b8-80bb-573c-17580d0e02a5@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr23QkpXpoZa1pxzZz-HTqQQDBS0k=jyvvssivjQqmraZw@mail.gmail.com> <7d3a9eb3-cee3-d855-0bc6-0c397b29a963@gmail.com>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2016 23:20:40 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKD1Yr1DqXe4PRu+oZc=euhGmtNk-_n7jC6H-kL8AiL79a-7bA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11408f08af61880538c6f5a3
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/LfalrPNKGSwPEkmLxDfy8-nOIHs>
Cc: "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] MTU option for DHCPv6?
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 29 Jul 2016 14:21:02 -0000

On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 2:27 AM, Alexandre Petrescu <
alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> wrote:

> Alexandre, that doesn't make sense. The only specified mechanism for
>> IPv6 on 3GPP links is RAs.
>>
>
> I would doubt so.  I think DHCPv6 is there in the 3GPP specs too.


DHCPv6 PD (only) was added in release 10. SLAAC has been there for at least
a decade, I think.


> There is no Ethernet on cellular links, where did you get that from?
>>
>
> From packet dumps, looking at the headers.


Just because the driver of a device you own pretends that the 3GPP link is
an Ethernet link doesn't mean that there's Ethernet on the air. Look at an
Android phone and you'll see something completely different - no Ethernet
address and a different ARPHRD_xxx value.

It is a bug when the Host configures so many IPv6 addresses on its
> interface.  It's looking like getting out of hand.
>

RFC 7934 claims the opposite.