Re: Additional Documentation Prefixes (was Re: AD Evaluation : draft-ietf-6man-ra-pref64-06)

Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca> Mon, 04 November 2019 00:21 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
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 A79AA12006E for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 16:21:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 3SLv7Eeb7Ylz for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 16:21:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3710C12003E for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 16:21:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07EDB3897A for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 19:18:19 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 546F7560 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 19:21:10 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca>
To: IETF IPv6 Mailing List <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Additional Documentation Prefixes (was Re: AD Evaluation : draft-ietf-6man-ra-pref64-06)
In-Reply-To: <7fd283ed-2328-6a9e-eb86-c5c155ebfd84@gmail.com>
References: <F1B31C38-7CDB-4057-A573-D6AF76B264D3@kaloom.com> <CAKD1Yr1vOqTvEsv0oCm+bu7CkFwiyFv8_G1XM+4JAKYLoA21aA@mail.gmail.com> <27802.1572732078@localhost> <F95A29A5-CEAF-4A23-A678-C5465B248E42@kaloom.com> <24180.1572801507@localhost> <7fd283ed-2328-6a9e-eb86-c5c155ebfd84@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2019 19:21:10 -0500
Message-ID: <23094.1572826870@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/47BQzHB_N6ZZ-TIGgexQPSRDuUM>
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: Mon, 04 Nov 2019 00:21:15 -0000

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
    >> I guess L=1 is why you call it ULA-L. I have known it as ULA-Random.
    >> We are both talking about RFC4193 though.  So such a document would need to
    >> update RFC4193.

    > I think this is a bad and pointless idea. Pointless because it is 100% OK
    > to use any RFC4193 prefix as an example, since by definition it will never
    > be used on the Internet, and the chance of collision on a given ULA site
    > is 1 in 2**40 (and who cares anyway?). Bad because it means that millions
    > of existing boxes that can generate ULA prefixes would be non-conformant
    > and, seriously, is any vendor going to update date their firmware for this?

So, each time a document uses a ULA-Random in an example that calls for ULAs,
someone will ask why they didn't use 2001:db8::/32.

The other plus is places that ask for a ULA to be typed in can recognize the
Documentation prefix, and suggest that maybe that's not what they wanted to do.

{I don't expect any ULA generator to get updated, as you said, 1/2**40.
But, on the other hand, how many ULA generators are out there?}

--
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT architect   [
]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [