Re: [homenet] Which IP addresses must be avoided?

joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> Tue, 17 May 2016 22:39 UTC

Return-Path: <joelja@bogus.com>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBA0012DAEC for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 May 2016 15:39:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.326
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.326 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 A7tT58ZKClJQ for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 May 2016 15:39:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 434D812DAB1 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 May 2016 15:39:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mb-2.local ([IPv6:2601:647:4204:51:591a:551d:2ead:2204]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id u4HMdOGO059240 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Tue, 17 May 2016 22:39:25 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: nagasaki.bogus.com: Host [IPv6:2601:647:4204:51:591a:551d:2ead:2204] claimed to be mb-2.local
To: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>, Ray Bellis <ray@bellis.me.uk>, homenet@ietf.org
References: <87wpms8zvo.wl-jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> <5ae48799-cb13-2b68-a4cc-a56b6174ae4f@bellis.me.uk> <573B4BA3.9020709@isi.edu>
From: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
Message-ID: <0714bb3f-3450-2cb2-d685-b3142faf3018@bogus.com>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 15:39:23 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <573B4BA3.9020709@isi.edu>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="8um77LDtCWNrDPGtkO3rxAb6CEKAEXsMf"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/bPAPXAA8KjeGJWGkr8i73cuJtQU>
Subject: Re: [homenet] Which IP addresses must be avoided?
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/homenet/>
List-Post: <mailto:homenet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 22:39:32 -0000

On 5/17/16 9:49 AM, Joe Touch wrote:
> 
> 
> On 5/17/2016 9:35 AM, Ray Bellis wrote:
>> However some operators have (had?) "classful" firewall rules that
>> prohibit packets that come from IP addresses that would have been
>> considered a broadcast address in a pre-CIDR world.
> 
> It's been 23 years since pre-CIDR and 15 years since you experienced
> this error.
> 
> If we can't assume a fix here, then we can't assume any of the IPv6
> reserved IDs are actually reserved either - they could easily be in use
> by legacy equipment.
> 
> I.e,, the Postel principle applies here:
> 
>     - avoid assigning these addresses
>     - test your equipment to ensure that they allow these addresses
> correctly
> 
> If only we had compliance testing (again)....

I'm not really concerned that we broke windows95, neither is Microsoft.

We use these IPs for production VIPs and testing in a CDN (as /32s) and
they are fine.

> Joe
> 
> _______________________________________________
> homenet mailing list
> homenet@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
>