IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [homenet] homenet-prefix-assignment update - prefix length 64 and on prefix comparison

Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> Thu, 09 October 2014 19:23 UTC

Return-Path: <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
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 A40101A1A5C for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Oct 2014 12:23:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.007
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.007 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.786, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] 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 YkoMdEAVgW_C for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Oct 2014 12:23:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 815721A1A42 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Oct 2014 12:23:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s99JN4NW007630; Thu, 9 Oct 2014 20:23:05 +0100
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk s99JN4NW007630
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=201304; t=1412882585; bh=h/JdJeWGbmun742SdJ0Gvzu6Dvk=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=5CWsjhH15SgR9ANqHEaMm0xv9HxpcmwwO7l1ViV22WA6ZuL2jqBzmt2o4IlTh2Fd2 J51ZbFhAlhrhqkxrEF1J4XqQO/N0jECFQjv5T4BL4EcpRxzT60TGENFca1D28iXs3/ 46WlAudqsF5QCjsXc2cHans5WNohIJW6ZvHUSehU=
Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25d]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) envelope-from <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> with ESMTP (valid=N/A) id q98KN40302012769yE ret-id none; Thu, 09 Oct 2014 20:23:05 +0100
Received: from [192.168.1.108] (host213-123-213-183.in-addr.btopenworld.com [213.123.213.183]) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s99JMr0c010611 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 9 Oct 2014 20:22:54 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <0D6BC65B-CD29-4C90-8787-365C79542DDC@employees.org>
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2014 20:22:53 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <EMEW3|0bf2a71c0149ccab46ab7b399538a486q98KN403tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|C6EA0921-F56B-4F5B-AF22-75D90496D93F@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
References: <A0C73AEC-6D0F-498B-9BDD-D6AF91202CCB@darou.fr> <54350D62.5050706@gmail.com> <048F40EB-A1D5-4D70-986B-9DDE55FF7C22@darou.fr> <FAFE72E2-04EC-4B27-BE1F-6E2F9F7F7A1C@employees.org> <37213B35-CAE1-4AF7-B94D-2B5EAD1C4A39@darou.fr> <5308B561-200A-455C-B2E9-4B4824ED2A1D@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <EMEW3|2f5d8f14bb6cf818659db375e4a75ba0q97FLf03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|5308B561-200A-455C-B2E9-4B4824ED2A1D@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <5435D845.9030108@gmail.com> <AE46801C-D3EA-436A-9894-CCF9B9E46A5D@townsley.net> <A50A4BEF-B267-4BFF-8DDE-297D03A16DBC@darou.fr> <0D6BC65B-CD29-4C90-8787-365C79542DDC@employees.org> <C6EA0921-F56B-4F5B-AF22-75D90496D93F@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
X-smtpf-Report: sid=q98KN4030201276900; tid=q98KN40302012769yE; client=relay,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=5:0; fails=0
X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: s99JN4NW007630
X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/w1ScD8PtohT8-rcfkKEDgZPsNRQ
Cc: Townsley Mark <mark@townsley.net>, "homenet@ietf.org" <homenet@ietf.org>, Pierre Pfister <pierre.pfister@darou.fr>, Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [homenet] homenet-prefix-assignment update - prefix length 64 and on prefix comparison
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: Thu, 09 Oct 2014 19:23:19 -0000

On 9 Oct 2014, at 12:03, Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org> wrote:

> it doesn't make sense to specify something that breaks SLAAC.
> 
> protocol design is politics. we want to make it clear to the address delegation authorities that not delegating a large enough address block will lead to breakage.
> 
> in my view, if we let this principle slide, then the risk isn't that the delegations are /80s, but that they will be /128s. and you're back to IPv6 NAT anyhow.

So - provocative question - should this draft be Experimental in status instead if it’s diving below /64 boundary?

Tim

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email