IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: IPv6 configuration model (was Re: Adoption call for <draft-pref64folks-6man-ra-pref64-02>)

<mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> Mon, 17 December 2018 08:58 UTC

Return-Path: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.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 AA865124BAA for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Dec 2018 00:58:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 t0-MPGiaDVHp for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Dec 2018 00:58:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from orange.com (mta240.mail.business.static.orange.com [80.12.66.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D8E912426E for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Dec 2018 00:58:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from opfedar02.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.4]) by opfedar21.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 43JFRZ5ZCMz7vP1; Mon, 17 Dec 2018 09:58:02 +0100 (CET)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown [xx.xx.31.27]) by opfedar02.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 43JFRZ4rnkzCqkc; Mon, 17 Dec 2018 09:58:02 +0100 (CET)
Received: from OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::60a9:abc3:86e6:2541]) by OPEXCLILM7C.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::8007:17b:c3b4:d68b%19]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Mon, 17 Dec 2018 09:58:02 +0100
From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>, Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>
CC: 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: IPv6 configuration model (was Re: Adoption call for <draft-pref64folks-6man-ra-pref64-02>)
Thread-Topic: IPv6 configuration model (was Re: Adoption call for <draft-pref64folks-6man-ra-pref64-02>)
Thread-Index: AQHUk8PpBJsxRzTsrEqxcQX+cnId96V+rf0AgACYL4CAA1SEMA==
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2018 08:58:02 +0000
Message-ID: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93302E05BF33@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <BD1717B3-C013-4718-9140-283F312C1634@employees.org> <80d6c628-4ac0-e5f8-4374-fe04e378c1c4@huitema.net> <CAKD1Yr11=A8anSY8XB9iYRomFxYugwYn1fhTtRinJuceiXSAWQ@mail.gmail.com> <C902DD97-C894-4FE8-BE9A-24C05C4BAD88@employees.org> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1812141005280.3869@uplift.swm.pp.se> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93302E059195@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1812141259150.3869@uplift.swm.pp.se> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93302E05928C@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1812141343210.3869@uplift.swm.pp.se> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93302E0592F6@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1812141510390.3869@uplift.swm.pp.se> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93302E05A553@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1812141642440.3869@uplift.swm.pp.se> <CAO42Z2zNZN3fZ-dsL1ZC6xmAwkEeNmkm3g2yvAaE=niR+ATyvg@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1812150724210.3869@uplift.swm.pp.se>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1812150724210.3869@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.168.234.4]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/-M3AnhakZnynLnib8yKeWGb6Fs8>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Mon, 17 Dec 2018 08:58:07 -0000

Mikael, 

The procedure for selecting the PCP server for a single-homed PCP client is as follows: 

(1) use whatever server that is explicitly configured to the client. FWIW, standardized means for configuring PCP servers include both IETF ones (DHCP (RFC7291)) or BBF (https://www.broadband-forum.org/technical/download/TR-181_Issue-2_Amendment-8.pdf).

(2) if no server is configured: assume default router (LAN case) or DS-Lite AFTR (CPE in DS-lite mode) are the pcp server, or go for anycast PCP addresses. 

Cheers,
Med

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Mikael Abrahamsson [mailto:swmike@swm.pp.se]
> Envoyé : samedi 15 décembre 2018 07:27
> À : Mark Smith
> Cc : BOUCADAIR Mohamed TGI/OLN; 6man WG
> Objet : Re: IPv6 configuration model (was Re: Adoption call for <draft-
> pref64folks-6man-ra-pref64-02>)
> 
> On Sat, 15 Dec 2018, Mark Smith wrote:
> 
> >> What is the destination address of the PCP packet you're going to send to
> >> discover the NAT64 prefix?
> >
> > Probably,
> >
> > RFC7723, "Port Control Protocol (PCP) Anycast Addresses"
> 
> Sigh, this means the local LAN router can't be configured to say "oh, use
> the NAT64 over there" without having to intercept packets to this special
> address, and then if it only wants to configure NAT64 and nothing else I
> guess it has to have some kind of forwarding behaviour to the "real"
> NAT64?
> 
> This is not a good way to provision NAT64 relay prefix to clients in
> several scenarios. I'm sure it's fine for a large operator running a
> mobile network or similar, but if I were to try to use this in my home
> that'd be quite advanced way to get this information into clients.
> 
> --
> Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email