Re: [dna] #19: Discuss issues with manually assigned addresses

"dna issue tracker" <trac@tools.ietf.org> Wed, 16 September 2009 20:24 UTC

Return-Path: <trac@tools.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: dna@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dna@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E01EB3A683C for <dna@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Sep 2009 13:24:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.551
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.049, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OHZ2XCJTeHZ4 for <dna@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Sep 2009 13:24:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zinfandel.tools.ietf.org (zinfandel.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2001:1890:1112:1:214:22ff:fe1f:1e54]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DC793A681D for <dna@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Sep 2009 13:24:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=zinfandel.tools.ietf.org) by zinfandel.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <trac@tools.ietf.org>) id 1Mo13f-0001cb-CT; Wed, 16 Sep 2009 13:24:55 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: "dna issue tracker" <trac@tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Version: 0.11.1
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
X-Mailer: Trac 0.11.1, by Edgewall Software
To: suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com
X-Trac-Project: dna
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 20:24:55 -0000
X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/dna/
X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/dna/trac/ticket/19#comment:1
Message-ID: <075.651a9e988808597645e2ee311972fb9c@tools.ietf.org>
References: <066.f0dcf5fc8c75a9395837ffcd34826270@tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 19
In-Reply-To: <066.f0dcf5fc8c75a9395837ffcd34826270@tools.ietf.org>
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: ::1
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com, dna@ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac@tools.ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zinfandel.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Cc: dna@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dna] #19: Discuss issues with manually assigned addresses
X-BeenThere: dna@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Reply-To: dna@ietf.org
List-Id: DNA working group mailing list <dna.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dna>, <mailto:dna-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dna>
List-Post: <mailto:dna@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dna-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dna>, <mailto:dna-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 20:24:06 -0000

#19: Discuss issues with manually assigned addresses
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------
 Reporter:  suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com  |        Owner:  Suresh Krishnan
     Type:  defect                        |       Status:  closed         
 Priority:  major                         |    Milestone:                 
Component:  simple                        |      Version:                 
 Severity:  Active WG Document            |   Resolution:  fixed          
 Keywords:                                |  
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------
Changes (by suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com):

  * status:  new => closed
  * resolution:  => fixed


Comment:

 The following text will be added to an appendix.

 Appendix A.  Issues with confirming manually assigned addresses

    Even though DNAv4 [RFC4436] supports verification of manually
    assigned addresses this feature of DNAv4 has not been widely
    implemented or used.  There are two major issues that come up with
    confirming manually assigned addresses using Simple DNA.

    o  When DHCPv6 or SLAAC addresses are used for probing, there is no
       need to aggressively retransmit lost probes.  This is because the
       address configuration falls back to vanilla DHCPv6 or SLAAC and
       the host will eventually obtain an address.  This is not the case
       with manually assigned addresses.  If the probes are lost, the
       host runs the risk of ending up with no addresses at all.  Hence
       agressive retransmissions are mandated.

    o  Another issue comes up when the host moves between two networks,
       one where manual addressing is being used (say NET1)and the other
       where dynamic addressing (DHCPv6) is being used (say NET2).  When
       the host moves to NET1 from NET2 it tries to confirm both the
       manual address and the dynamic address in parallel.  If the probe
       for the manually assigned address is lost, the DHCPv6 probe will
       succeed and the host will incorrectly end up using the DHCPv6
       assigned address (from NET2) on NET1.

    Given these issues, it is NOT RECOMMENDED to use manual addressing
    with Simple DNA.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/dna/trac/ticket/19#comment:1>
dna <http://tools.ietf.org/dna/>