Re: [homenet] Let's make in-home ULA presence a MUST !?

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Fri, 17 October 2014 06:45 UTC

Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDCBC1A90D6 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Oct 2014 23:45:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.967
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.967 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, PLING_QUERY=0.994, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 P5aHPS1qEqYW for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Oct 2014 23:45:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (swm.pp.se [212.247.200.143]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E46701A90ED for <homenet@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Oct 2014 23:45:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 1A821A1; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 08:45:23 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1413528323; bh=jfCreuG9x+G/KMrvSjuDSac/JOCnYJGJsrcE2oVcNko=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=RnigJsP5/aX9G1h94seNITsfoHBwUVhzSN69rOUlzmKNZeRjxY3Hnc6MY8Xpodj2g sLpFgvZQT/ZISkJjMjaLby4cIgcc8oO5YJXgV1XhsNX/vCP8HimKqKsxnDLjALoyQM 6Q4xIBJ6onG4tPQ2U/kVCRoN11wa2Z015S/GWXC8=
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 153C99F; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 08:45:23 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 08:45:23 +0200 (CEST)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr3Fa7hgXZReWFgmHA9pLnH=ezHLXh-aAdA-_N=AR3AiyA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1410170839540.30853@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <CAAedzxp1R-C5E9RJVMVLRJxPc0w4zooPtqnvWK9eggpZu4=xtg@mail.gmail.com> <543EA248.2080700@mtcc.com> <CB50B30B-DC36-4354-96B7-19AE415BD03F@fugue.com> <543EBE40.3030201@mtcc.com> <BA5ABBFA-9D13-4975-A96C-530FE958322A@fugue.com> <543ED2A7.3090409@mtcc.com> <1569644A-50C4-47B6-908E-262BC62BCD14@fugue.com> <543EFBF1.6040101@mtcc.com> <457D177C-232E-4590-A9ED-80048140157F@fugue.com> <CAKD1Yr1kix0HxWsC4n7ta4EG-6YhMMdYCTnFFXGb2ATQBbkMHA@mail.gmail.com> <DCB62D43-DFD3-4985-8FAA-896CEA3BD342@fugue.com> <CAKD1Yr3kJQetKzgYyZ1vpxKT31=wiNavxTM+WoUTg2gP5Dx4LQ@mail.gmail.com> <94C19398-AC5A-416F-8C3E-EA6B1750C22C@fugue.com> <CAKD1Yr1rpFeZuy=nXFSj+dpa749RhJJ2j9+U=cmFq_4cCsC_4g@mail.gmail.com> <4D6F2B13-D63E-4FEE-A136-B510126CC1C9@fugue.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E61130EA3B9A@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <1AA5DBBD-C3C5-4AFD-A043-6A69AE7FBDB9@fugue.com> <CAKD1Yr3Fa7hgXZReWFgmHA9pLnH=ezHLXh-aAdA-_N=AR3AiyA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/ilu8S-j8MlghNfomDYzpj5zOxeI
Cc: "homenet@ietf.org" <homenet@ietf.org>, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Subject: Re: [homenet] Let's make in-home ULA presence a MUST !?
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 06:45:27 -0000

On Fri, 17 Oct 2014, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:

> You keep mentioning this, but you're incorrect. Even if the ISP 
> flash-renumbers, hosts will not lower the lifetime of their IP addresses 
> below 2 hours, per RFC 4862.

Where in RFC4862 is this described?

A lot of time was spent on RF7084 and its predecessor, making sure it was 
a requirement to send RAs with zero-lifetime for the on-link prefix if the 
delegated prefix went away, so hosts would stop using it very quickly.

So my expectation if the ISP flash-renumbered (ie reset the PPPoE session, 
the physical uplink went down or the DHCPv6-PD lease expired), an RFC7084 
compatible router would send out RAs with zero-lifetime and hosts would 
immediately stop using these IPs for new connections. Am I wrong, and 
where can I read up on the behaviour you're describing?

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se