IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: 64bit MAC addresses and SLAAC

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Thu, 18 June 2020 10:59 UTC

Return-Path: <pthubert@cisco.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 0B0BC3A0AC3 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 03:59:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=NExVAywS; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=LYBu5VqM
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 AHi1Bm4EtPAN for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 03:59:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.86.73]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 96D313A0ABD for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 03:59:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1960; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1592477945; x=1593687545; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=kvyydG1ZhsXrWluJWSK7/3dM3X2ZsZnAYZrWbS9TmwE=; b=NExVAywSCQkcNTiZMcXS+y9ukqynJxmnWHYkSTuU3VCfbzJW+i72bRNO 7YQwVuhxHjoEzC8CWHmF25Twmduf175S6FibtYb/NiDgMMap++fApFDnI sA4t/3ctNDKQTqCOxhazE6q4C/C50lMGGYyRInc1yTLoahUqwb4/doVE5 U=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.73,526,1583193600"; d="scan'208";a="788714417"
Received: from alln-core-9.cisco.com ([173.36.13.129]) by rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 18 Jun 2020 10:58:35 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-002.cisco.com (xch-rcd-002.cisco.com [173.37.102.12]) by alln-core-9.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 05IAwZhw004364 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 18 Jun 2020 10:58:35 GMT
Received: from xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) by XCH-RCD-002.cisco.com (173.37.102.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 05:58:35 -0500
Received: from xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) by xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 05:58:34 -0500
Received: from NAM10-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 05:58:34 -0500
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=C6+aBAGewpPBzJ1tBW0RdHOUAa4BHn2/J+GqzSeYDNt7gsXZnUvaXaEGg6GtD2w3N1BK9uYys+D3AT1FwTJbPmxGLMhI0DNv8DA78UwZ3puY09R11CnWhNWJ1Yhbsew5w3LaikjIsi0+X889Tvg9t5M7O8ZtnnfsoJG6KvfnY4/CiAQbQCnyfBPwxWCmn+M9vc3WODTD17k8iCx1uHEC73piRWBM8slJkhHYj/qLy6oNIsFWk/ZAACBZSLXuebLkOvSec4YX1zXsnpNsmq0fC41/gFa8HbOJzVcr3JF1zTFDi1CcaJDHjztyxEpirGY922lMrvjQw0U4fODv5fBstQ==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=kvyydG1ZhsXrWluJWSK7/3dM3X2ZsZnAYZrWbS9TmwE=; b=SByfykG1C3TRN6+ZSxK8rEPCv2zJLgnq9Ov5zaAOFOyNwV/aKjW6P1/a3zKJoGWBVPbCtBU4RQASEADV+zVwH8KeDa+8keRiaL7Oej6rL9ECyXeQtDTfTJlaZB+B1LxDCi7bOjDl3LLhNhn7NJPC4kLUAjkYwT8budHE21A/z9Ga36SjgWBBsptwrUnkUIrEOHKULh4dFthObYWQAqA+xoCJiglTQ482LB1cTUx4wx17sqVJOUjToHIcxu45b7rwpjGYxUzXX4HA3SXNCJUpvlKVzhg/EFYTWGkfavtLRFNbrl75DUmujPtAB7LyN+/uSbXwUIFv8Rrjq+P6xUlCNg==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=kvyydG1ZhsXrWluJWSK7/3dM3X2ZsZnAYZrWbS9TmwE=; b=LYBu5VqMKg15n/tOQOZ0wcFeT5ePtgGJoe+Xr4WL4Q9wCMQfqKvx6HIWZGmbtXa2PgkGy6yb4jD4fKtf2IQ1r0x/XJRCrcDmqLuCbP+aorFYrYxQMdF/tILQfi3oUd7WNL7uBz13UDog1z+pcWDYE0+aEsa8MrOIYkMd0cc58d0=
Received: from MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:ea::31) by MN2PR11MB3855.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:f6::31) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3109.22; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 10:58:34 +0000
Received: from MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::55bb:b065:86c1:1108]) by MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::55bb:b065:86c1:1108%6]) with mapi id 15.20.3088.028; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 10:58:34 +0000
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, "Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>, Kerry Lynn <kerlyn@ieee.org>
CC: IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: 64bit MAC addresses and SLAAC
Thread-Topic: [EXTERNAL] Re: 64bit MAC addresses and SLAAC
Thread-Index: AQHWQ1Nk/Wm1QKfgRUa8EREqh7bvtKjaKcSAgAKHaYCAAD3hAIAAD/cAgAD3E7CAACxPAIAAEo1g
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 10:58:13 +0000
Deferred-Delivery: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 10:57:34 +0000
Message-ID: <MN2PR11MB3565F51E022582BB4B979D2ED89B0@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <e8a25961-5ac9-d35e-77dd-bf86f45cd077@gmail.com> <a17ae9f3-001c-07f6-84f9-a0ca583e6a00@gmail.com> <7AE5B6D0-AB01-4077-A9EF-5BD86F428681@gmail.com> <7a3b839f-099e-8fd3-35a2-4625df3c369e@gmail.com> <76e8bd7a-4333-480f-de0f-dcc775418739@si6networks.com> <79d494caa7874696b787aadb80cc322b@boeing.com> <MN2PR11MB35654EDB29696C2C33412691D89B0@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <7e430050-fa9a-d43c-5eaa-a8f7d53d222c@si6networks.com>
In-Reply-To: <7e430050-fa9a-d43c-5eaa-a8f7d53d222c@si6networks.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: si6networks.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;si6networks.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [2a01:cb1d:4ec:2200:88e9:b821:f5a3:344a]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: b7d92082-26b0-46cb-f312-08d813768b7a
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR11MB3855:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <MN2PR11MB3855F2E5E2F42B594A166C74D89B0@MN2PR11MB3855.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:2733;
x-forefront-prvs: 0438F90F17
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: LiRq6dPLks3/2YwplUNbs5ymYj8KUloP0QeL/xvSjUEEBRTwp+AbrpD0VKtdKZpsQyet9bNbHPeObsiS+iFN2nMzUqCwaWxbJfMEW13WuUjYaCdDTC2rW9fgdlVGtimJsjddaxTLafyVA5sFlnL4AZlUl49YvK+KumpuCpO8zmgz3e6ZchKQiEL2t6OVEhUH6oZ0ZQ9CyCQ+Ty1h8G56qpPtGWJRhdwuTIatYChdY7TBHfgAsGrIEooxoPABo3jOH96r8BgknxgC9L5n4QhdZ3RF/QvtH73KoPJE36B27jn22ERQeb6U7oiL3lzDH0T8hrs3uHnBzPryL6Mu8XbGWg==
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:(4636009)(366004)(376002)(39860400002)(346002)(396003)(136003)(52536014)(71200400001)(76116006)(64756008)(66946007)(66556008)(66476007)(66446008)(6666004)(5660300002)(9686003)(55016002)(86362001)(4326008)(186003)(316002)(8676002)(2906002)(7696005)(33656002)(8936002)(110136005)(478600001)(6506007); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: b7d92082-26b0-46cb-f312-08d813768b7a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 18 Jun 2020 10:58:33.9354 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: gAsgU5TESAY8V8h59Mz93m7LAByrUShko8kaneevFTpvSx442S6mxM2L+x+rHhBR0SmiDfmE7QuKJG674d7G9w==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR11MB3855
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.12, xch-rcd-002.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-9.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/2Lst15ptSzxcc6bfEsbRuNUI40M>
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: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 10:59:07 -0000

Hello Fernando:
 
> > Note that this
> > looks antinomic with the spare part goal above; that would indeed be
> > antinomic for burn-in MAC addresses; but there are also standards out
> > there that use a shorter assigned MAC address, e.g., to reduce the
> > frame size and save energy and bandwidth; in that case you can have
> > both properties of deriving the IPv6 address from the MAC and
> > replacing a failing device by a virtually identical one.
> 
> I don't mind when this sort of thing is employed for specific scenarios
> such as the one you describe. However, it would seem seem to me that if
> you really need the addresses to embed the underlying link-layer address
> so that you can compress the IPv6 header and keep the associated
> overhead at a decent level... one might (unfortunately) want to
> reconsider the extent to which IPv6 is really applicable here, or
> whether some sort of gateway that bridges a low-overhead simple protocol
> with the rest of the network might be a better approach.

I read that you're wondering if a particular domain should enjoy the benefits of IPv6 because of a preconception on how to form IIDs coming from another domain. Is that your intent?

Pascal

"
Ian Malcolm: That is one big pile of shit.

Ian Malcolm: Life will find a way.

Ian Malcolm: Life finds a way.

John Hammond: Welcome, to Jurassic Park!

Alan Grant: Life found a way!
"

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email