IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: A common problem with SLAAC in "renumbering" scenarios

Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> Tue, 19 February 2019 12:58 UTC

Return-Path: <sander@steffann.nl>
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 98CA9131027 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 04:58:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.301
X-Spam-Level:
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: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=steffann.nl
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 0Fmwx9sHRten for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 04:57:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.sintact.nl (mail.sintact.nl [83.247.10.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9D0B130F50 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 04:57:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28CBD4A; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 13:57:54 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=steffann.nl; h= x-mailer:references:in-reply-to:date:date:subject:subject :mime-version:content-type:content-type:message-id:from:from :received:received; s=mail; t=1550580903; bh=pvcpQtNEHuxJ5FCFaDc K9YcU9En3aV95Z2Fjixw/zHg=; b=aB7PMQcvVpcn9xfptxWFB1T9GGC9wUgwwaQ hOpXSbGUbuNZJAWIBzl3jzRwWlCS+ZAeqIgPuLquuce4B8PEEXtrkLSYulIKv0PC xUfCgKDBhE7Zyh3fz3Zcwz15+nq8JK2Q4395s5FDSieH1lPOPcmFmQmCQg8P5Ysi p9uoe2qg=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.sintact.nl
Received: from mail.sintact.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.sintact.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id dzTAw14aeSqZ; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 13:55:03 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [IPv6:2a02:a213:a300:ce80::10] (unknown [IPv6:2a02:a213:a300:ce80::10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 87D6B49; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 13:55:02 +0100 (CET)
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
From: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
Message-Id: <BD0E39C3-6D81-4432-AE2B-82E2FCFFD0A0@steffann.nl>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_4131FBBE-2C3E-47D6-BEE9-C3B3D30DDE55"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha256"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.2 \(3445.102.3\))
Subject: Re: A common problem with SLAAC in "renumbering" scenarios
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 13:55:01 +0100
In-Reply-To: <BAB3061A-1808-4C0E-AA1B-2D7DD5BA63FC@employees.org>
Cc: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
To: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
References: <60fabe4b-fd76-4b35-08d3-09adce43dd71@si6networks.com> <c16e0e1f-1ed2-ad88-80f1-070bdd8bccca@go6.si> <1F2C2AEE-1C7D-481C-BBA7-7E507312C53A@employees.org> <e56a6e5b-648d-200e-c35d-97f15a31fb2a@asgard.org> <CAO42Z2zh7fKAgQJq9aLCTiFoSSsTeGM=pK3gXitg+gcxH=9fhQ@mail.gmail.com> <d38857c2-6e92-91d6-bb5d-d3eeeb61276a@gmail.com> <CAO42Z2yb47OyXk__Sz-kO00pfcBJgLAhff5DF=mpAddR0iCnAA@mail.gmail.com> <2612280f-195a-ae7a-b3b1-9022d9282fa7@foobar.org> <56F813F4-C512-40A9-8A68-1090C76A80F6@consulintel.es> <CAHL_VyCN8kU7qnLOphfGR25-xGBe_p6WeGTkKVXwU5uy5aJ8Dg@mail.gmail.com> <65DB4854-97D2-4C31-A691-2CD93812EF93@consulintel.es> <CAHL_VyCMpCcGkEQu+RV1GRf2QLB-HD0+AOOBV0YhfQ5sbydVzQ@mail.gmail.com> <8CE7A0CD-97D9-46A0-814D-CAF8788F9964@consulintel.es> <e3e0bf2273e04f15b792665d0f66dfe5@boeing.com> <4c5fab33-2bff-e5b5-fc1d-8f60a01a146d@go6.si> <b4525832-9151-20bf-7136-31d87ba6c88d@huitema.net> <463f15cf-2754-e2e8-609d-dc0f33448c6c@go6.si> <ff649810-7242-7bc2-d36f-3f998f7bdd71@asgard.org> <9CDF41CA-83B4-4FC4-B995-EF79727C5458@steffann.nl> <CAO42Z2wA+vLmU7+sU6xLK7TO6pWfNQA5shs9zp=PqANCihLmBQ@mail.gmail.com> <BAB3061A-1808-4C0E-AA1B-2D7DD5BA63FC@employees.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.102.3)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/2tIGw9iNnymOjT_Ddm-w5O1i_4k>
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: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 12:58:07 -0000

> Indeed. Wonder how these pesky mobile phone operators manage to deliver the same telephone number to a user, for years. Across different providers and contracts.

Tunnels and the phone equivalent of NAT :)

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email