IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Int-area] Comments on current MPvD draft.

Pierre Pfister <pierre.pfister@darou.fr> Wed, 15 November 2017 21:24 UTC

Return-Path: <SRS0=iMb8=CN=darou.fr=pierre.pfister@bounces.m4x.org>
X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BAE11270A3 for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 13:24:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 BtCOsaq18Qw3 for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 13:24:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx1.polytechnique.org (mx1.polytechnique.org [129.104.30.34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 613531271FD for <int-area@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 13:24:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.31.172] (unknown [42.61.208.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ssl.polytechnique.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8813B5648C1; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 22:24:22 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.1 \(3445.4.7\))
From: Pierre Pfister <pierre.pfister@darou.fr>
In-Reply-To: <B2E3A40F-0250-4C16-90A0-E27500B3A42D@fugue.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 05:24:17 +0800
Cc: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke@cisco.com>, int-area <int-area@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D52E5D56-86AD-4FCB-8053-B86CDA982CEA@darou.fr>
References: <45957315-A9A2-4E11-9069-5C41C7397034@fugue.com> <CE5C3A81-51FA-4042-90E0-04930B361A88@cisco.com> <CAPt1N1=xLg-a+sn+fij=3x4aaOBBen=tdFW1p2c_kB5xtua86w@mail.gmail.com> <AD475B56-F10F-4EBA-B93F-DBD4E4086602@cisco.com> <B2E3A40F-0250-4C16-90A0-E27500B3A42D@fugue.com>
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.4.7)
X-AV-Checked: ClamAV using ClamSMTP at svoboda.polytechnique.org (Wed Nov 15 22:24:24 2017 +0100 (CET))
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/_RChc4k8CO8Dj5uz83BDB0odACc>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Comments on current MPvD draft.
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <int-area.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/int-area/>
List-Post: <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 21:25:21 -0000


> Le 16 nov. 2017 à 05:07, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> a écrit :
> 
> On Nov 16, 2017, at 12:03 AM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <evyncke@cisco.com> wrote:
>> This could be an alternative but I can only imagine the pile of changes to be done... RA-guard, RFC 4890, ...
> 
> Wouldn't these changes be required as well if you used a different multicast address?

RA-guard (RFC6105) doesn't mention the destination address as a way to identify RAs.
It makes sense since both unicast and multicast RAs must be filtered.
Please tell if you know about implementations behaving differently.

- Pierre

> 
>> In either alternative (different link-local group, different ND code), we HAVE to ensure whether it is doable with the existing HW/SW in the routers/switches/AP... I am afraid that this is more complex to change the network/routers than the end-points (thinking about OS/HW refresh cycle) but I can, obviously, be wrong on this statement.
> 
> Yes.   So this is once again arguing for the encapsulation solution.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> Int-area@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email