IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Non routable IPv6 registry proposal

Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com> Thu, 21 January 2021 01:39 UTC

Return-Path: <christopher.morrow@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87EC83A0AE1 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 17:39:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 RSV7VyhHJ2SJ for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 17:39:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qv1-xf31.google.com (mail-qv1-xf31.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f31]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5A983A0ADF for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 17:39:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qv1-xf31.google.com with SMTP id bd6so206070qvb.9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 17:39:04 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=MMxYtvCT29vETN/CtZCUiubnD/d/ZIrRysUBf4yukjw=; b=jvE4IJ3/0a+VY4TCbPIwwcSPXBKTTrYMD9u8k92vr2jXy+erwQX2dQ7VhIFlA0yJip O37lIAowYqknh4tY8hCZKklcw1nPQbpZkKRdQ3Uw1rhDiGZNSBGD7U+1w6lYVHABuytj 7qDHfjseMEZ1ve5OU8WCzx+aFoCGrg0kSISBEi7g1no0hIeAiiNkwvm2ZqQAqEWQ/d+F +cCVLYsk+db/Zu1EfOekz0nMJEoewuEI7QLdvbx5Zs5W7TWbVoVAq9wq+OTVl3auDsQd XFDqmxD4i30n1r82EUV5a910lZYa1dso/0RqLZBkG0MLcLDt3IabojBsrCpygFb3XZEs yiTQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=MMxYtvCT29vETN/CtZCUiubnD/d/ZIrRysUBf4yukjw=; b=jlU6rnNf7Wr4qH9coj6v0kHCky784YhtuhvmwzO9OQ1tY4+ZPW/XExYKDADDcGWi/c 09sw2iWAalAbZeXDa1sKY9gswzvIMj3orBH/tFZ88pXijFtF1ilTAX28PEqfFyyoDlkI x+YZuzdLs3w/6WZYC0In3fsCnJy9z3j4Hb/Nqcnkx3c2/AQZVMDuPW3A43MBBRnBkVr5 XlLWheB/URT2Fl7/e2bdwZRY7aqrslw5nYsWECvgPVp3bCihrW4hO5QDl0zNHCeYMr+f 6I0mTgeG2F4JY7CKZ3R14NInYiz8RU2KUlLjCvx1d4Z/AdNeug0+ToPJl0eTfqjtfFqo sPaw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532usT24Wwo0qJ/1B5l7SHFwlDe/R+NLx+oUG4lJy47O1ignW1cp pVQWwyNiepJ8OFZmU5cauIYgvf5y9GZFHq6gpkKPkA+4pLVCrQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwIEeNbWBWwG0yrR7Aw2sdymmx5ZCu0Hh6YvEfqEXJAu8o4sDhu2yiR57eJzViQMnO0FxrGTaQvROvwSSYc0pY=
X-Received: by 2002:a0c:b526:: with SMTP id d38mr12130380qve.7.1611193143397; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 17:39:03 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210120211046.074FE6BC171B@ary.qy> <6794f7c4-7a37-7676-c245-d33a84384280@si6networks.com> <d4b56f13-b387-8663-81b3-38544ce9dcb2@taugh.com>
In-Reply-To: <d4b56f13-b387-8663-81b3-38544ce9dcb2@taugh.com>
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 20:38:52 -0500
Message-ID: <CAL9jLaaaOLtRDnEzffk5+rW9bJmcU+4p8hX+FRKMLzpRKaCDfA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Non routable IPv6 registry proposal
To: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Cc: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, IETF general list <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/XJlhNe1M-yTK01KFzj3KK50R6sw>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2021 01:39:07 -0000

(I'm not a ULA fan, it's going to cause problems.. but)

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 7:16 PM John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>
> > No. Collissions are actually almost guaranteed (birthday paradox).
>
> When I do the birthday paradox calculation, I find that the chances that
> 100,000 random numbers each 40 bits long are all different is about 95%.
> I'll take those odds.
>

Warren made this website/application/etc:
  http://mac-collision-probability.appspot.com/calculate

which was used for privacy address problems/discussions, but... if you
make it 40 bits and 100,000 stations
apparently you'll get a collision 1 out of 220 times. I think that
means that ULA network selections COULD overlap at about the same
rate.

There are ~1.4m small businesses in the US, if they all chose ULA
that's more than a few collisions.
Collisions matter because when 2 networks that collide come together
it's messy :( to untangle and decide whom is going to do what :(
it's also not always obvious that it's happening :( until something crashes :(
> Regards,
> John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
> Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email