Re: [v6ops] Revision of the SLAAC/renum I-D (Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum-01.txt)

Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com> Wed, 20 February 2019 09:09 UTC

Return-Path: <furry13@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 0B5601276D0; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 01:09:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.75
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 EdycGGRMQGxi; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 01:09:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt1-x830.google.com (mail-qt1-x830.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::830]) (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 7A4D4124B0C; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 01:09:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt1-x830.google.com with SMTP id o6so26356918qtk.6; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 01:09:12 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=xYKH4MKZJacDAX8sjuS2dgArqUbwGfaBlJPrSI4yrTM=; b=QgRZNJpHkupfaY6jCJeFxjFaCnGDYz0ocq9fJoegEXI9EB6DlI3xm1pzpqQNe8DKHY ft4qmMwlPr14WXE/mwbsuLpdTSlhxdA0LK10m1hw1bx+mKnMa3Fv3FdaOFKaZSy+raGd pUMuSfDnCtiZoQ4LIgPIAKXxfT9P7hd7Au47903emzFhttWCDY4hQYkwTh223SZkL0us YgOpBJ3470Y1EuBHBtEFABss65zC2VZRBP17llx2AxqyERt+cqAjyiZwdHTI3c7BUazz LmaewaRbvKnb926gkfx3cvIWJqKm69995DdC5JgH/AKyqO2eLP7Au4IaXyj5MuisrxZ7 ywNA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=xYKH4MKZJacDAX8sjuS2dgArqUbwGfaBlJPrSI4yrTM=; b=Z7wQyXOk+qdOPp5//JOUrRlx1OJ/ma2aae2akI1Ogv0fyvCam5c4dqMp5xJ6PtpQio MEoLxKxrNPaIxwRZGAG6pLKDHJoueTfAX6bPKiC1Y+96133/gMCE24n2FFI36gr3DzBh a/W0WIZpsqyk7trovorGLaanuW1/QT0coeoPYlMxjeHlOIBuZZgUzC4OZ0yHOZIdFMd2 /4hsywr17QCMd4rGSW+7dveTV5Va7zMmc/UArlCGBpX2qCexbORRXtDRQtcid2yaTKwQ pMCRbdNTApw9UDNsNSz/EoIeYyj8oIRI0Zdp5JmXQTl3haitCr5L3CGzrwXrfXM+cytz CkGQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuZqEwatr8SMiummy+rPin3rwRSlixfYergHZgLefgiZnLhx1ZVA 5olZ0QSPuR+cczc43gdXBQoOVyduT5mGBmthGafkvw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IYTZ3iq9eJmlO4de4QfAAUNcJV1bpiKJeqC21THmipYIxv4cxibgYK5kxyHxaZSeRloTW5Y8QAyQuBrM1IVj4A=
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:3341:: with SMTP id u1mr25237516qta.58.1550653751425; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 01:09:11 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <155053352190.25856.12031845488827430669.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <fe9eecc0-b41a-53c5-5e17-7f8d732cb7cf@si6networks.com>
In-Reply-To: <fe9eecc0-b41a-53c5-5e17-7f8d732cb7cf@si6networks.com>
From: Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 20:08:59 +1100
Message-ID: <CAFU7BARkjRQ3k1wE7SQysf8+_AageKYd9BxC9-J89UFrB2mGwg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Revision of the SLAAC/renum I-D (Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum-01.txt)
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Cc: "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>, "Jan Zorz @ go6.si" <jan@go6.si>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/5MFdOmhlYn5ELYbPP3zDb1OrD1E>
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: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 09:09:14 -0000

Hi Fernando,

On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 10:48 AM Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> wrote:
> We have posted a revision of our I-D, which expands a lot on the problem
> and possible solutions, based on the email discussion we had on this list.

A few comments:
- (sorry if I missed another thread on it - I'm catching up with
emails slowly): any reason for setting Valid Lifetime to 0 as well? It
looks to me that just deprecating the prefix would be enough..What
would be a benefit of completely removing an address already
deprecated?

- "After normal processing of Router Advertisement messages, Router
   Advertisements that contain at least one PIO MUST be processed as
   follows" - I'd suggest you make it explicit that PIOs must of of
the global scope. I did see CPEs including PIOs for fe80::/64 (and
AFAIR such behavior is not explicitly prohibited);

- the draft makes an assumption that "while network
      configuration information might be split into multiple RAs, PIOs
      will be spread among *at most* two RAs." - I'm not sure where
this assumption is coming from - is there any requirements for routers
saying it MUST/SHOULD do this? Adding any references to support such
assumption would be very helpful.

-  as I've mentioned earlier, it would be nice not to break other
scenarios while fixing DHCP-PD case. So what do you think about
modifying the algorithm so the addresses are deprecated only if *all*
routers the PIO has been received from stopped advertising it? Again,
my point is that while proposed behavior *does* help in a single-homed
residential case, it would be nice to keep in mind other cases and
avoid breaking them;

- the proposed changes say that PIOs MUST be processed as
follows....and relies on hosts tracking prefix <> nexthop as per
RFC8028...However RFC8028 (and RFC8504) uses  'SHOULD' ...so it seems
to be inconsistency here..If a host does not implement RFC8029, all
those MUST in the draft do not make much sense.


> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: New Version Notification for draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum-01.txt
> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 15:45:21 -0800
> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org
> To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, Jan Zorz <jan@go6.si>
>
>
> A new version of I-D, draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum-01.txt
> has been successfully submitted by Fernando Gont and posted to the
> IETF repository.
>
> Name:           draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum
> Revision:       01
> Title:          Reaction of Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC) to
> Renumbering Events
> Document date:  2019-02-18
> Group:          Individual Submission
> Pages:          22
> URL:
> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum-01.txt
> Status:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum/
> Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum-01
> Htmlized:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum
> Diff:
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum-01
>
> Abstract:
>    In scenarios where network configuration information related to IPv6
>    prefixes becomes invalid without any explicit signaling of that
>    condition (such as when a CPE crashes and reboots without knowledge
>    of the previously-employed prefixes), nodes on the local network will
>    continue using stale prefixes for an unacceptably long period of
>    time, thus resulting in connectivity problems.  This document
>    analyzes these problem scenarios, and proposes workarounds to improve
>    network robustness.  This document updates RFC4861 and RFC4862 to
>    allow for a more robust reaction to network configuration changes.
>
>
>
>
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>
> The IETF Secretariat
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops



--
SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry