Re: <draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-09.txt>

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Sun, 23 July 2017 01:58 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.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 6E8F8124D37 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 Jul 2017 18:58:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 nrWVYwSOEyVY for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 Jul 2017 18:58:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf0-x22d.google.com (mail-pf0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D0A31318A3 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 22 Jul 2017 18:58:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id s70so35681597pfs.0 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 22 Jul 2017 18:58:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:organization:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=8n2qVJGdEA9NpnhhY15QbNGZtkSwt08KIvLLvgthYrI=; b=MFa44altydF6RAuXRP+TMYgMep3xsO4rEeDeMtCZVLvVEgFSnJAQZ9LgCABe9tkQNk 63dOhY8mIfy8x9GIMp7I/FeeNBYgPqNa16MZ05jKHjBNBnUTkJFBJTT/cmmfcK/SP7Ax ++XvHWzQg03chFrCoNGqmVbFB5fguucjbFW+SR8JTLfSeRzGYhwU/sESW1PLDXpAa7ln KknxIN/0Uk/7ZsmEqag1kTzCyHMFP6BBB/NI28zdMLqLsGUOZc5S/MsrOKIsZVogrpm/ w/QwDQ/dzDje7uj8zXwP2lOjBstQ9eUpQj/4XskuxuHoqRv0JHgS87tuFmS6MpA7KVhr D56g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=8n2qVJGdEA9NpnhhY15QbNGZtkSwt08KIvLLvgthYrI=; b=oadFDj5rwZKo3py2WQ5dxnK81WfKwoDcc6O3J68lkWCbll9XbutS4KoTHfqpoaAN/s 15RgbjJvs7yPh6D5HvPP5JY5b2jEL0iZ2WWZ9w6uES4xJBBmB3N4U4YE2KhJisAx1V1L JRWU6+2FsKpP9vg/tXyJhKWLIho7oWJ72S0Zi+wxN3enqYsmXqstooDVUqyfFX7TjxOI DwFmbIBsIdyS+X04IePN9HrNh1PXmH/8HF9KIfeB8lNqy7nFxPznVt/vyu9QlasXJ933 MFnkxmW4f3Viq79H1IqQLHe/pQOkp0igL2qM+Pebkh11iXvNULYWtjet3gsoVmcN1Erv 3D9Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw110FY16EgBUe6V4DXpyeBjOzSMGuh3eeXtzj0tXD/aBvQCITxHNo prqzSstCER0RzTlM
X-Received: by 10.99.126.86 with SMTP id o22mr11845184pgn.383.1500775085998; Sat, 22 Jul 2017 18:58:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e007:4a2d:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781? ([2406:e007:4a2d:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a29sm16962493pfg.30.2017.07.22.18.58.03 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 22 Jul 2017 18:58:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: <draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-09.txt>
To: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com>, "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>
References: <20150804195752.5065.13523.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <5AB14F48-2799-4A86-830D-E8A89CCADAAC@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr0Bt4hhBvtSVWrLpns4odzek3U5WJkuQoS1NGsPozW0sg@mail.gmail.com> <CAN-Dau3vVREsYc4Y6AAdDpLKsMjwH_2saS7JTn8P6fRDXRKV7Q@mail.gmail.com> <596F63F4.9010501@foobar.org> <fe7a1def-e656-c6d8-5336-ed5595331b74@gmail.com> <ed0fde09ae2a4a598c9a84eb0df659e8@XCH15-06-11.nw.nos.boeing.com> <69a7f9f2-584e-a2bc-1200-64fad8f9baf7@gmail.com> <652efa7dcb414b7ba6128bb4f93a3d7e@XCH15-06-11.nw.nos.boeing.com> <CAJE_bqfbLzfSYBBuS58CB6EWYkLLoqgGnb==v0CSScfZBFp=HQ@mail.gmail.com> <m1dYUCB-0000F6C@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <bf2ab8d8-9070-c53f-90bd-831630021749@gmail.com> <m1dYwTM-0000FzC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <be9f995c-b717-e87b-3ab9-3a1faa35d770@gmail.com> <1f01821f068b42839f238dfb06cf53ad@XCH15-06-11.nw.nos.boeing.com> <0a87d897-05f6-0834-3eb6-a72b36e29378@gmail.com> <e1da3dbb256b403bb99c3803105650ec@XCH15-06-11.nw.nos.boeing.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <422c7640-4dbe-26ce-a45a-f26a7cd6d3fe@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 13:58:01 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <e1da3dbb256b403bb99c3803105650ec@XCH15-06-11.nw.nos.boeing.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/-vqZ6zoWhIrPkGukQZYal8hpO0M>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 01:58:08 -0000

On 23/07/2017 12:10, Manfredi, Albert E wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com] 
> 
>> Actually, by removing all the exceptions in the -09 text, I
>> contend it is a considerable semantic simplification.
> 
> I agree that the "exceptions" could be reworded, because the issue is far simpler now than what the "exceptions" imply.
> 
> IIDs used in SLAAC, LLA, 

Link-local address creation is part of SLAAC (RFC4862 section 5.3).

> or ULA, 

There is nothing special about a ULA prefix. An address derived from
a ULA prefix may, or may not, be created by SLAAC. BCP198 applies
to ULA prefixes.

    Brian

> must be 64 bits long. Otherwise, there are no restrictions, other than the total address length must be 128 bits. So this avoids creating another new subtlety for IPv6, that serves no useful purpose (IMO).
> 
> One of the biggest changes in 4291-bis, which should carry over to RFC 2464 and others, has been deprecation of the use of EUI-64. The consequence of that change is that this 64-bit IID requirement becomes diminished, and by extension, the previously-listed exceptions increase. So now, rather than list the exceptions, we should be listing where 64-bit IIDs are still required.
> 
> I've no objection to using language like "default" or "recommended," though.
> 
> Bert
>