Re: [v6ops] Combining IPv6 ND and DHCPv6 into a single, unified function

Mikael Abrahamsson <> Tue, 21 November 2017 06:26 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 509D012EB2B; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 22:26:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.301
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.301 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jW5QS-H9p4C8; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 22:26:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D12AD12EB3B; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 22:25:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: by (Postfix, from userid 501) id D811CB1; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 07:25:33 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;; s=mail; t=1511245533; bh=fkBGjQ941tGk3kC34q5Zsia2PYuYDqFxiJTlwq7su5w=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=p5qDXCLmRyApjqZ4ZVGIkH9hPdYT18EtlLgZbJ44XhOFmjuN0Grqd9K1TCvRkZpOJ x3CNtrpB4hBuKM17wdlbdwAgMgaPrGGpxnaE2jpnu/g5G3SWJcEZHpMOhgU/GXt7lC 2PYyyQF4dTanTK9bLekpwMuhXcWnTxPQZzDVJD7U=
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4261B0; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 07:25:33 +0100 (CET)
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 07:25:33 +0100 (CET)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <>
To: Mark Smith <>
cc: "Templin, Fred L" <>, "" <>, v6ops list <>, 6MAN <>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Combining IPv6 ND and DHCPv6 into a single, unified function
In-Reply-To: <>
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 06:26:02 -0000

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, Mark Smith wrote:

> Hi Fred,
> I think this fundamentally violates the principle that the network is
> application agnostic or transparent, allowing it to support any new host
> residing application without any upgrades to the network. I think the
> principle of network application transparency should apply to application
> configuration.
> We don't have to upgrade routers to carry new application protocols, we
> shouldn't have to upgrade routers to support configuring new applications.
> "Internet Transparency and Application Configuration"

DHCP is a pain for rapidly changing (perhaps mobile) environments. It's 
fundamentally a polling protocol where the network hands out resources for 
a certain amount of time, and there is little chance to invalidate them. 
It's stateful.

Devices need addresses to communicate. So if environments that are dynamic 
and require fast/short setup times to gain addresses, then we need the 
network to support that.

This is not an "application" as in a program running somewhere. This is a 
deployment scenario where devices need addresses quickly with short 
turnaround times and in a bandwidth constrained environment. Saying we 
can't change the network to support this is just silly.

So you think 6lo was a bad idea and violated the network agonostic 

Mikael Abrahamsson    email: