[Int-area] Main change in draft-ietf-intarea-provisioning-domains-03: connection sharing

"Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke@cisco.com> Wed, 24 October 2018 09:51 UTC

Return-Path: <evyncke@cisco.com>
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 4263D130E70 for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Oct 2018 02:51:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.97
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.97 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.47, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 C0GGlQLkTK_Y for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Oct 2018 02:51:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-2.cisco.com (alln-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.142.89]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE4F1127148 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Oct 2018 02:51:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=12300; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1540374681; x=1541584281; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=czgHFH9SPZ12XithnDsU3qFYDJZMXJbWOZ47D0X1t8A=; b=A/QElX5RI4iHz32t4Bluu+wRMFG1SzL4OjcY8mby7XwDxLWKYrwOfS9h lNWj0FiQtMkvauD9W7xCLtaQvJwA+cSJdhGIoWG05fCgcvDm4cQBuyWO5 OEsCb/pPAFFlYkHI6eCbkllR1sQnE1v02rbxwmE2Qu/gSWFcs6Fmaih6q w=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AyAAADQNBb/4YNJK1jHAEBAQQBAQcEAQGBUQcBAQsBgQ13Zn8oCoNriBiMGJNbhUqBegsBASWEYIJzITQNDQEDAQECAQECbRwMhWQKXgFKAgQwJwSDNAGBHWQPpziBLoU7hGUFi2IXgUE/gTgfgheDUAEBAgEXhEoxgiYCjjyGFYoPCQKBWoUKihIXkDeMYolvAhEUgSYdOIFVcBVlAYJBixmFPm8BiyKBHwEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.54,420,1534809600"; d="scan'208,217";a="190821701"
Received: from alln-core-12.cisco.com ([173.36.13.134]) by alln-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 24 Oct 2018 09:51:21 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com (xch-rtp-015.cisco.com [64.101.220.155]) by alln-core-12.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id w9O9pK5d001414 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <int-area@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Oct 2018 09:51:20 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4; Wed, 24 Oct 2018 05:51:20 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1395.000; Wed, 24 Oct 2018 05:51:20 -0400
From: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke@cisco.com>
To: int-area <int-area@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Main change in draft-ietf-intarea-provisioning-domains-03: connection sharing
Thread-Index: AQHUa38dK7HQ5JpdgU+TA+mixjIeaQ==
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2018 09:51:19 +0000
Message-ID: <46F80B70-03CD-48C9-AF8E-404F9F827AFC@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.10.2.180910
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.55.56.4]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_46F80B7003CD48C9AF8E404F9F827AFCciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 64.101.220.155, xch-rtp-015.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-12.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/mtYnnAn_6ObK3_wa0hGS4nMPo8Q>
Subject: [Int-area] Main change in draft-ietf-intarea-provisioning-domains-03: connection sharing
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 24 Oct 2018 09:51:24 -0000

The authors of this draft would like to have some discussions even before the INTAREA WG meeting in two weeks. Especially on the major change about connection sharing (tethering) where the authors spent several hours on it.

See all differences in: https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-intarea-provisioning-domains-03.txt

The section 3.4.3 is about “Connection Sharing by the Host” and currently is:



------- start --------

   The situation when a host shares connectivity from an upstream

   interface (e.g. cellular) to a downstream interface (e.g.  WiFi) is

   known as 'tethering'.  Techniques such as ND-proxy [RFC4389<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4389>], 64share

   [RFC7278<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7278>] or prefix delegation (e.g. using DHCPv6-PD [RFC3633<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3633>]) may

   be used for that purpose.



   Whenever the RAs received from the upstream interface contain a PVD

   RA option, hosts that are sharing connectivity SHOULD include a PVD

   Option within the RAs sent downstream with:



      The same PVD-ID FQDN.



      The same H-bit, Delay and Sequence Number values.



      The L bit set whenever the host is sharing IPv4 connectivity

      received from the same upstream interface.



      The bits from the Reserved field set to 0.



   The values of the R-bit, Router Advertisement message header and

   Options field depend on whether the connectivity should be shared

   only with PvD aware hosts or not (see Section 3.2<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-intarea-provisioning-domains-03#section-3.2>).  In particular,

   all options received within the upstream PvD option and included in

   the downstream RA SHOULD be included in the downstream PvD option.
---- end ----

Comments are welcome before, during and after the WG meeting

-éric for all authors