IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Comments on draft-yourtchenko-colitti-nd-reduce-multicast

Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org> Fri, 21 February 2014 15:40 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F03491A016F for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 07:40:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.598
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.347, RCVD_IN_PSBL=2.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 LJQEQEBPBDYw for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 07:40:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from banjo.employees.org (banjo.employees.org [198.137.202.19]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0288C1A019A for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 07:40:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dhcp-10-61-104-86.cisco.com (173-38-208-169.cisco.com [173.38.208.169]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: otroan) by banjo.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7C46C60B1; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 07:39:58 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_42B1F205-46E9-4B56-A28C-3234B3736E64"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
Subject: Re: Comments on draft-yourtchenko-colitti-nd-reduce-multicast
From: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
In-Reply-To: <CF2D1B97.3122D%elevyabe@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 16:39:56 +0100
Message-Id: <4FB6D66E-1C63-45B0-8A7E-736639A532F9@employees.org>
References: <CF2D1B97.3122D%elevyabe@cisco.com>
To: "Eric Levy- Abegnoli (elevyabe)" <elevyabe@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/-aOKqgUU2NsQTKMxKsgSH9PxzKA
Cc: Erik Nordmark <nordmark@acm.org>, Andrew Yourtchenko <ayourtch@cisco.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 15:40:21 -0000

Eric,

> DHCP won't work without changes which would be a lot bigger that anything
> envisioned for ND address registration.

can you elaborate?

> DHCP does not maintain link-locals. That would be a major change to fix
> that, including on hosts, since address requests are responded in unicast.

do we need to care about link-locals? are they part of the problem we need to solve?

> DHCP does not maintain <IP, MAC> binding. It does not have the MAC (not to
> confuse with DUID).

true, but an onlink DHCP server or snooping relay could do an address discovery request to populate the ND table.

> DHCP is not on the forwarding path where we need the information quickly

what do you mean by that? if the function is on the first-hop router, then that's a deployment choice.
ND register also needs to solve how to deal with multiple routers. I believe -05 proposes that the host maintains the state in all on-link routers, but that has quite a few implications too.

cheers,
Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email