Re: [dhcwg] Call for Adoption - draft-bvtm-dhc-mac-assign - Respond by April 16, 2019

"Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com> Thu, 28 March 2019 10:20 UTC

Return-Path: <volz@cisco.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 672BC12026F; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 03:20:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.501
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=YAvI59fT; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=MO1NJNuC
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 MNOj6yQ1meWP; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 03:20:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A63D412027D; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 03:20:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=31068; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1553768401; x=1554978001; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=pKadK9BzP/oZw5wZl8ktwjEt/PQ1isP93O1QI4YrLCI=; b=YAvI59fTr91Yta8+OZZRb1zxKAkTVb0y1aM7HbMjLOSDNebJi/CV6hpi PxoHPJbpwwNfm1rckxgusECJZAOqpJOifGxQxVOv/KYCJhQj8cNc81R37 FHytIOyQbY+M8xUcmAED8Tq1wz5WbBhg3NmchdvMWThNWozpr4l+p4mxe k=;
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:jYtKOxa6i/oPRRRqMMj4HIX/LSx94ef9IxIV55w7irlHbqWk+dH4MVfC4el20QKbRp3VvvRDjeee87vtX2AN+96giDgDa9QNHwQAld1QmgUhBMCfDkiuMvnufQQxHd9JUxlu+HToeUU=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AFAAAYn5xc/5xdJa1jDgsBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEHAQEBAQEBgVIDAQEBAQELAYEOL1ADaHQECycKhASDRwOPKoJXlw6BLhSBEANUDQEBGAEOBYRAAheFGCI1CA0BAQMBAQkBAwJtHAyFSgEBAQICAQEbBgoTAQEsCwEPAgEIEQQBASEHAwICAiULFAkIAQEEAQ0FCAyDD4ERTAMVAQIMnm4CihRxgS+CeAEBBYExAQMCAg8PgzEYggwIgS8BizEXgX+BEAFGgkw+gQSBOCUBAQECgSIVCx4MGAcJCIJMMYImiiOCWYQih0qMRgkCh2qDTIgpggNdhSWMB4NOhwoJS4YJjTECBAIEBQIOAQEFgU4BNiiBLnAVO4JsCYIBDBcTgziFFIUEO3IBgSeMACqBBAGBHgEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,280,1549929600"; d="scan'208,217";a="250978963"
Received: from rcdn-core-5.cisco.com ([173.37.93.156]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 28 Mar 2019 10:20:00 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-007.cisco.com (xch-aln-007.cisco.com [173.36.7.17]) by rcdn-core-5.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x2SAK0MF019557 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 28 Mar 2019 10:20:00 GMT
Received: from xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) by XCH-ALN-007.cisco.com (173.36.7.17) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 05:19:59 -0500
Received: from xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) by xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 05:19:58 -0500
Received: from NAM03-CO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (64.101.32.56) by xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 06:19:58 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-cisco-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=pKadK9BzP/oZw5wZl8ktwjEt/PQ1isP93O1QI4YrLCI=; b=MO1NJNuCj/773O9TilvdsX9v2sQclGbN/hXKxhdglPOYA/2E0vbZiSI4AQULRZU32qGoqFLrtLrHHZ1o0Vig9zNlROhisgctTRWDM684X7hKWHBFVFVIBJyiE3GOn2IOkdbk5gIFiwNWuTKvkAv4XTMh9WLZ5+5XM/aPLYOJqis=
Received: from BN8PR11MB3601.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.178.219.23) by BN8PR11MB3777.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.178.221.144) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1750.15; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 10:19:57 +0000
Received: from BN8PR11MB3601.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::6490:fc00:ad84:5469]) by BN8PR11MB3601.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::6490:fc00:ad84:5469%3]) with mapi id 15.20.1750.014; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 10:19:57 +0000
From: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>
To: Tim Chown <Tim.Chown@jisc.ac.uk>, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
CC: "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>, "draft-bvtm-dhc-mac-assign@ietf.org" <draft-bvtm-dhc-mac-assign@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [dhcwg] Call for Adoption - draft-bvtm-dhc-mac-assign - Respond by April 16, 2019
Thread-Index: AdTkpBCEA5XApI1yRbqQQJuwUdwNuAAAzLAAAAg8hAAAIDdYgAABMxEw
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 10:19:56 +0000
Message-ID: <BN8PR11MB36012843D90BC72058BFB332CF590@BN8PR11MB3601.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <DM6PR11MB361126AF4FD6E9443B76C4C7CF580@DM6PR11MB3611.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <8E936B87-EA8F-4A2C-AEBC-74231D93E175@jisc.ac.uk> <C704CC7D-2EBB-4A01-8388-AA8DBB93C696@vigilsec.com> <16CC73D4-FCF1-49EE-A249-E9F1B8E0B961@jisc.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <16CC73D4-FCF1-49EE-A249-E9F1B8E0B961@jisc.ac.uk>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=volz@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [173.38.117.84]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 3710afcc-86d0-4186-c3eb-08d6b366ed7f
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600127)(711020)(4605104)(2017052603328)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:BN8PR11MB3777;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BN8PR11MB3777:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 7
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BN8PR11MB3777A07F41559961D20D6D56CF590@BN8PR11MB3777.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-forefront-prvs: 0990C54589
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(346002)(366004)(396003)(39860400002)(136003)(376002)(189003)(199004)(4326008)(3846002)(790700001)(14444005)(6116002)(81166006)(33656002)(55016002)(66066001)(81156014)(256004)(8936002)(229853002)(606006)(8676002)(71200400001)(71190400001)(5660300002)(52536014)(6246003)(26005)(14454004)(478600001)(966005)(102836004)(6506007)(7736002)(6436002)(476003)(76176011)(11346002)(186003)(2906002)(99286004)(446003)(486006)(53936002)(97736004)(316002)(54896002)(93886005)(68736007)(86362001)(7696005)(6306002)(236005)(9686003)(54906003)(106356001)(110136005)(53546011)(105586002)(74316002)(25786009); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BN8PR11MB3777; H:BN8PR11MB3601.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: EbmXkxNvAfo7oCMA297RH+uVyQC8aDLsZIZwTvbqtkjflMoQCKY9svJ6TRMEc1Wc4c8HNzqx9h2Dx2VNhWWXAopuBZTmRxjBd0r3K+6IOa8UmOt9/EFYwCjZlm42ouieX7Wp4Mz19EkpDFlO+YwgDouFjqF+qTXeD+aIQ2beXWWq6DiOVBFLQnAfxAYp2x5Gv3OR3QDtPZGQQLJKbt0/W0hR05qNg22MowTcRI10me82iOhZOHxyGM1lbq8LOtQA1ym1Cg45ChL2CCmGYMfLHf/8RxwV8pD5MMOit5Q6S64WHRRdOY41R1DB1DN1kEPFJnz8Vq7V7P3XSDxTemUHmzfqimQ94yO98sN8kGMu5+bdYUECBsdIRdNYTTQRE5EZeenuP15D/uGWs9rrxFObfJGkTddeXqjsSg2AgSW38gY=
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BN8PR11MB36012843D90BC72058BFB332CF590BN8PR11MB3601namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 3710afcc-86d0-4186-c3eb-08d6b366ed7f
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 28 Mar 2019 10:19:56.9941 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN8PR11MB3777
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.17, xch-aln-007.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-5.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/S2DRoom_QTGBQQvXWHiguCbJtUE>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Call for Adoption - draft-bvtm-dhc-mac-assign - Respond by April 16, 2019
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: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 10:20:24 -0000

The host booting one is an interesting one. The main issue here is that DHCPv6 requires (link-local) communication and that requires a mac-address. So, we kind of have the chicken and egg problem.

The most obvious way forward is that the device uses a temporary short term randomly assigned address (from perhaps some limited mac address space) to do the DHCPv6 communication to obtain a longer term mac-address assignment. The device could ask for the a link-layer address assignment and an IA_NA (or IA_PD) at the same time and thus need only one configuration round trip. Obviously the client identifier (DUID) used should not be a link-layer derived one (but a DUID-UUID or DUID-EN). The temporary short term address may result in conflicts, but not sure that is really that fatal as retries will hopefully clear that up (except perhaps if you had very many devices all trying to boot at once, such as after a power recovery).

Another option might be to provide some means of multicast link-local communication (this is similar to DHCPv4 where broadcasts are used), but this would require sending multicast without a link-local address and I haven’t explored whether that has all sorts of issues as most networking stacks probably can’t easily support that (and we tried to avoid need for special communications with DHCPv6 as that raised the complexity for DHCPv4 implementations).


  *   Bernie

From: dhcwg <dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Tim Chown
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2019 5:32 AM
To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org; Bernie Volz (volz) <volz@cisco.com>; draft-bvtm-dhc-mac-assign@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Call for Adoption - draft-bvtm-dhc-mac-assign - Respond by April 16, 2019

Hi,

I asked a question related to this at the mic at the meeting, but it's not clear (at least yet) whether the mechanism is designed for host bootstrapping, or for a connected host to request a pool of MAC addresses (which I understand to be a starting address and number of sequential addresses that can be used beyond that) for its own use, e.g., internal VMs.  I had the feeling from the discussion that it was the latter case, but I would support exploring the first case too after adoption.

Perhaps the chairs have some further comment on that.

Tim


On 27 Mar 2019, at 18:09, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com<mailto:housley@vigilsec.com>> wrote:

I understand that the IEEE 802 might work on a protocol to dynamically assign a MAC address, but I think it is important to get both an IP address and a MAC address in one round trip.  That needs to be done in the IETF.

I support adoption.

Russ



On Mar 27, 2019, at 10:13 AM, Tim Chown <Tim.Chown@jisc.ac.uk<mailto:Tim.Chown@jisc.ac.uk>> wrote:

Hi,

I support adoption. I understand the IEEE is supportive, and that there is no other alternative being proposed in that community.

I agree we should keep the "quadrant" draft separate.

Tim




On 27 Mar 2019, at 13:56, Bernie Volz (volz) <volz@cisco.com<mailto:volz@cisco.com>> wrote:

Hi:

As discussed at the DHC WG session at IETF-104, we are trying another call … this starts the WG Call for Adoption for the draft-bvtm-dhc-mac-assign-02 document. Please respond by end of day April 16, 2019 whether you support adoption of this work or not.

This was presented at IETF-104 (see https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/104/materials/slides-104-dhc-link-layer-addresses-assignment-mechanism-for-dhcpv6-refresher-01) and also IETF-101 (seehttps://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/slides-101-dhc-mac-addresses-assignment-for-dhcpv6-01) and discussed with our Area Director (Suresh) as acceptable work for the DHC WG to adopt. This work was also presented by Tomek and Bernie to the IEEE P802.1CQ discussions at the OmniRAN meeting in May 2018 – slides available at https://github.com/dhcwg/dhcp-mac/blob/master/ietf-dhc-mac-assign.pdf, as the IEEE is exploring allocation protocols.

If you are silent, it is not possible for us to know your support or lack therefore; so please do respond if you feel this work is something the DHC WG should (or should not) work on.

Thanks much!


  *   Tomek & Bernie

PS: We will also start a call on the extension work draft-bernardos-dhc-slap-quadrant<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-bernardos-dhc-slap-quadrant-01.txt> shortly.
_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org<mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org<mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg