IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: RFC6724-bis?

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Thu, 22 September 2022 22:01 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04806C152574 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Sep 2022 15:01:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.907
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.907 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Jrg2DddDfodv for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Sep 2022 15:01:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi1-x230.google.com (mail-oi1-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::230]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43B9DC14CF0A for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Sep 2022 15:01:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi1-x230.google.com with SMTP id m81so14166439oia.1 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Sep 2022 15:01:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=aNRbcifiFb+xVavPnoRFs3EEUmm5ToJaXyRJKethizw=; b=veYtopTaXt3pg3Tl1OVfePVY5uhp1VVPqhaiM7BaljXxyq1r5Xu3RyK4uj29NAKpWB BncmbIg8tPPaRMYYN8Y3o71BVbvKwXmL94OVdgD2sbYXoZ9B5qEmXe8Ppu/zklQ5s4rX 4Xc3WgWAs1kKrWFTPoBP5yAvKTkVCdLVHaXDrHd6kRAi4UCkWp+8P0dYUZXUGYKBr5KE L26Yv9/zsYu0s7wuXVoT8+pbkHLdqbLEp4pRe5gVKCR8LD64jylZ7xItF8uyn/4auMql UOpFBri5Gn0cqoI+621tGEm9U8DlBaEgtQtozOcoMvA/1Vmhu3KfopEP4u1VfX5r19AW k0zw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=aNRbcifiFb+xVavPnoRFs3EEUmm5ToJaXyRJKethizw=; b=5fLOVg8Q8wRRiTUmThFWjcp7LzATMWhXVoUDfCMx6zFxLpBDwIVApNpbYvI4byXiy/ 5syS3teWwmAmTTt1QVBInFthSppyJypt4EXOGbIJvcznDz6aakd4umuMr40Fnoolshte TfgJkKAaVOd5HXjlo0cNYfGTqg/18q9m0l6BJbsV6l2n4r7mpGVqBZcs3nxYbxaXtxRv jXq6sPia/UuJQTX1wJ2+97Yn/zFIER/BwCDxlp0gTLGYLkCxBhZ5VSMb6vxD7Oik/aW/ R9OXupLb+i11eTbJHpEfabbl/wecxJys14sTWLFFTyBgrnmtGbf+RFUvj/P54drQDVSW wLGA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf0j9GoblpHoPk4Kqo/kyiWD9BL/KTfGcRAZLY/ruJgjaEf43EHN qxBDIlXioLx1J3V5IqjHqx1ETFRmGrPqdXE8mhZ8Sg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM4VqfYRlo9PiRreWeIsxJ2mlVGPSKeJe7hLIEKm8UGXpFSxHWVh5yrqFjijVVuHOdHMaj9c30ITDC3tzr2Q2cQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:181e:b0:350:e92a:9ab1 with SMTP id bh30-20020a056808181e00b00350e92a9ab1mr2593914oib.209.1663884114173; Thu, 22 Sep 2022 15:01:54 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <66892DC8-6DA4-4DC8-85B0-E1E1647CD9F7@gmail.com> <CAM5+tA9kttCKrZaoB7UzNdE6TU1qGNMaxDmWvFtRvpB4A8+WHA@mail.gmail.com> <8FE71499-D155-4853-A964-6617F6EA2069@gmail.com> <CAM5+tA9QuYxVs+NXBD3dAYr_Y=95bWt63WjmEMDOfegL0Z4otA@mail.gmail.com> <CAM5+tA_hg2sXXsYw6Tcx-ytRAMkKQcFw8a3N7SfEXwbuPm0LMw@mail.gmail.com> <00ea3b70-ba8e-b6ef-e1ce-fdd56828f506@gmail.com> <CAPt1N1=_9Rwj-HnUZKWfatARbHWptArmSAV-qdi8MKyoBf9R0A@mail.gmail.com> <7fd6a3da-c1d2-bd19-5eaa-70afca839299@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7fd6a3da-c1d2-bd19-5eaa-70afca839299@gmail.com>
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2022 18:01:43 -0400
Message-ID: <CAPt1N1=Ajc4SoXorpouTkg5MP4o_RD3-+NhK77xakj+cziW_7A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: RFC6724-bis?
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Cc: buraglio@es.net, ipv6@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000092b4ee05e94b357a"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/-JRFUDeE9SyBzQhDpuJgBHmUHS0>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2022 22:01:56 -0000

Op do 22 sep. 2022 om 17:54 schreef Brian E Carpenter <
brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>

> On 22-Sep-22 23:07, Ted Lemon wrote:
> > Wouldn’t increasing the ULA priority have the problem that we’d get
> longest match wins on alien ULAs though?
>
> How would you discover an alien ULA in the first place? I'm really not
> concerned about that, but the alternative of dynamically preferring a ULA
> /48 prefix when it is announced on-link avoids the question.


 Right. I think we are agreeing.

>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email