[dhcwg] Re: dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6-ra: source addrs / server ID
David 'equinox' Lamparter <equinox@diac24.net> Thu, 25 July 2024 22:37 UTC
Return-Path: <equinox@diac24.net>
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 60C59C16940B; Thu, 25 Jul 2024 15:37:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ltIVUJvDBs4n; Thu, 25 Jul 2024 15:37:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eidolon.nox.tf (eidolon.nox.tf [IPv6:2a07:2ec0:2185::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41EFFC14F5EA; Thu, 25 Jul 2024 15:37:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from equinox by eidolon.nox.tf with local (Exim 4.97.1) (envelope-from <equinox@diac24.net>) id 1sX756-0000000D4sx-2Vz6; Fri, 26 Jul 2024 00:37:05 +0200
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 00:37:04 +0200
From: David 'equinox' Lamparter <equinox@diac24.net>
To: Bernie Volz <bevolz@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ZqLTkNcJU3oWIL_9@eidolon.nox.tf>
References: <ZqKH7_uPWWcC5u_D@eidolon.nox.tf> <C79ED4EC-A0E4-4239-BAA5-9847F31A8C25@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <C79ED4EC-A0E4-4239-BAA5-9847F31A8C25@gmail.com>
Message-ID-Hash: KA4TRQPFZ5EGRAXMD4VLSY3H3Q2KBTEI
X-Message-ID-Hash: KA4TRQPFZ5EGRAXMD4VLSY3H3Q2KBTEI
X-MailFrom: equinox@diac24.net
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-dhcwg.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: dhcwg@ietf.org, draft-porfiri-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6-ra@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [dhcwg] Re: dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6-ra: source addrs / server ID
List-Id: Dynamic Host Configuration <dhcwg.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/hunTQMp3dMAL7YrbZOvMDGask9s>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dhcwg>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:dhcwg-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:dhcwg-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dhcwg-leave@ietf.org>
> On Jul 25, 2024, at 12:53 PM, David 'equinox' Lamparter <equinox@diac24.net> wrote: > > Now the L2 switch translates incoming IPv6 4o6 replies into IPv4 for the > > legacy client. The 4o6 packet has no IPv4 source address; the L2 > > switch needs to come up with one. Is that going to be 0.0.0.0? On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 06:14:51PM -0400, Bernie Volz wrote: > Yeah, but if clients are using ipv4 for communication, something will > need an address to route the packets? Otherwise, why bother with v4? The router needs v4 for the legacy client's nexthop, yes. But the draft describes doing the translation on L2RAs, which generally never had IPv4 addresses to begin with (nor a need for any). -equi
- [dhcwg] dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6-ra: source addrs / ser… David 'equinox' Lamparter
- [dhcwg] Re: dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6-ra: source addrs /… Bernie Volz
- [dhcwg] Re: dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6-ra: source addrs /… David 'equinox' Lamparter
- [dhcwg] Re: dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6-ra: source addrs /… David 'equinox' Lamparter
- [dhcwg] Re: dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6-ra: source addrs /… Bernie Volz
- [dhcwg] Re: dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6-ra: source addrs /… David 'equinox' Lamparter