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

Richard Patterson <richard@helix.net.nz> Fri, 15 February 2019 12:21 UTC

Return-Path: <richard@helix.net.nz>
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 C1A00128D0B for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 04:21:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=helix-net-nz.20150623.gappssmtp.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 buJLZuxNZ3u3 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 04:21:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yb1-xb35.google.com (mail-yb1-xb35.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b35]) (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 625D1128AFB for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 04:21:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yb1-xb35.google.com with SMTP id s76so3690240ybs.10 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 04:21:01 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=helix-net-nz.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ECWtP5W1UgOD6+35/NOdQngfYFXEr01AfCGvxsaj38E=; b=vu3VtiV8o9etpFpumrdaT1bYdO9SK6NrjQO4j4rVoMdQzTkhJ9L7KKU8vH4WOKg2tk BTGkLv5XyGymbXVs0lCLFKLpGUfmynKKZ595t0b8pg8VafJtISh3Morkl7xOCu+EgazP sXWda4ZXkTWmVN/RTTKfPKwtyXcNPhehpwE0rXfvl/x77/Fk1lIwZsUU8WtQVGMZ6eoH pkVfrWgLXpewCwCu3znbXNIXfJYtETeWKLuWTvy3HTz0vecFgyVvAzlqBJIrgWLNQR+3 gdbzPSoQJp4VjsiZL1k5Ste0HTIoyv1c4qQs4QEDLJKtfldb/mezPbb85Ixm1IgpIicC foJA==
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=ECWtP5W1UgOD6+35/NOdQngfYFXEr01AfCGvxsaj38E=; b=il+o2CJAtm5bVE2xepXmfzWecv33Q26CQtAOQwrGClJnAfhlxq2DXjhOJkl1emUQDE /YtW6P6IrJqWi0mi/X3Amo5dU/8GQ3MMZq14oD0Rq0QwdRwg73wowKMF+NbtthLikjnW A3XXc+uKKUJwX+QoxYOr91QV9lf93TPQOY0O2nqxvvI11LUW8EJHLFU02Gt3+wbbJbhX LYo1XBb3y8Jq+2neUL7SUCarVMmoH9ERxOwsNY1LyUn4MM8T6UGH2Z8navPO9LTxcvwA Loji8UcbDxVnIUuqCIOqLWoTQvmdc+6WKRsgxqQTyrEbWNgcHJqbAUqsvcKnc6Mc9pkj zntQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuaTQb5BZicLiVeP2bu2PXw6wGEH/3g17b48cw1YHCdHrTUoVolB dssiiUDXgN91kpOOfSLoHHUfw/ZpS6w=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IahUcw7WSCC+QAhji4ypgirEbskVAeesrTYlBcRAjUEPsi+mvdcxvDDBBTRFU5c3hOy682rRg==
X-Received: by 2002:a25:f203:: with SMTP id i3mr7379727ybe.155.1550233260263; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 04:21:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yw1-f47.google.com (mail-yw1-f47.google.com. [209.85.161.47]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w63sm1908388ywc.46.2019.02.15.04.20.59 for <ipv6@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 15 Feb 2019 04:20:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yw1-f47.google.com with SMTP id k188so3612389ywa.6 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 04:20:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:a81:6c50:: with SMTP id h77mr7593673ywc.280.1550233259173; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 04:20:59 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <60fabe4b-fd76-4b35-08d3-09adce43dd71@si6networks.com> <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> <444A9043-0EDF-4F21-9DCE-BF019B81D078@huitema.net> <9BA9D825-2B75-47FA-999E-2712E151AD01@huitema.net> <1b1a78b8-ccba-2085-0fb0-0c957e782146@moth.iki.fi> <7bab7a8a-1136-9b53-56b1-6401e62947d5@go6.si>
In-Reply-To: <7bab7a8a-1136-9b53-56b1-6401e62947d5@go6.si>
From: Richard Patterson <richard@helix.net.nz>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 12:20:47 +0000
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAHL_VyDKh+R4UC5qicbEk-qVkYi8wxkXabPRn_mw9fi_1QHZ9g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAHL_VyDKh+R4UC5qicbEk-qVkYi8wxkXabPRn_mw9fi_1QHZ9g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: A common problem with SLAAC in "renumbering" scenarios
To: Jan Zorz - Go6 <jan@go6.si>
Cc: 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/5ak2Owx-USlkIWcLFFIwIQorPGo>
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: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 12:21:04 -0000

On Fri, 15 Feb 2019 at 12:16, Jan Zorz - Go6 <jan@go6.si> wrote:
>
> On 15/02/2019 11:55, Markku Savela wrote:
> > However, I'm also very much for privacy. If there is possibility to
> > change address, the change trigger control should be on the user, not
> > on operator...
>
> Bingo!

And that mechanism already exists in the form of a DHCPv6 RELEASE, but
not if the assignment authority has been removed from the DHCPv6
Server, and placed within RADIUS instead.