Re: IPv6 certification - IPv6 Router Advertisement Lifetime 0 and Reachable time 10 seconds

Le 25/01/2021 à 05:55, Isaac a écrit :
> Ole/Tim Winters/IETF team,
> 
> Yes, we understand these knobs but we wanted to understand more on 
> the scenario/topology. More importantly we wanted to understand the
> real world scenario when this combination of RA lifetime 0 and
> reachable time 10 seconds is used and the technical merit of it

The technical merit of it is this: when the default router has a
reachable time of 10seconds the backup router has to do the same.

The merit is in that the Host receiving the RA continues as before when
the backup becomes the normal.

This is an explanation I am trying, but I never tried it in practice.
It might be wrong.

Alex

  for which we did not
> get clear response (especially in the modern global IPv6 networks 
> context). It's surprising that the certification bodies haven't
> clearly mandated only common/practical (although IETF has mentioned
> that these paramers need to be configurable but never said explicitly
> that all permutation/combination of values need to be supported.
> Vendors (definitely want) comply to RFCs but do not want allow
> impractical values) use cases but have listed even the corner
> scenario which may never be used. We understand that there are
> thousand vendors who have implemented this combination. But we fear
> that these are extra burden for vendors considering that vendors go
> ahead for certification without questioning the certification body
> itself believing that the certification body does its job of
> validating the modern technical relevance. Ideally, we expect the
> certification body (if not IETF) to re visit all the tests
> periodically to understand the relevancy as time passes and modify if
> required (which is the purpose of the certification body we believe).
> Sorry to have spilled certain discussions pertaining to certification
> body in this forum. But we do not have much option as we want
> technical answer from the IETF group. Let's not stop with the high
> statements in RFC. The reason we approcahed IETF is to go one level 
> deep (especially in the context of modern day global networks) to 
> undertand the relevance of RA lifetime 0 and reachable time 10
> seconds whether it makes sense to support. These are our 2 cents
> contribution to the community (if there is someone to listen!)
> 
> Thanks, Isaac.
> 
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 2:30 AM Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org 
> <mailto:otroan@employees.org>> wrote:
> 
> Isaac,
> 
>> Need a favor, (if you have it handy) could you please point to a 
>> configuration by Cisco router (any of the product type would do) 
>> which sends out the RA lifetime 0 and reachable time 10 seconds and
>> how commonly (practically) that is used? (Especially in the context
>> of modern global networks where customers want things done 
>> autonmously/automatically with the least number of knobs possible)
> 
> A quick search would have found that information for you. Basically: 
> interface Ethernet0 ipv6 nd ra lifetime 0 ipv6 nd reachable-time
> 10000
> 
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/ipv6/command/ipv6-cr-book/ipv6-i3.html
>
> 
<https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/ipv6/command/ipv6-cr-book/ipv6-i3.html>
> 
> Best regards, Ole
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative
> Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 