IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: RFC8064 implemented in linux ?

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 02 July 2019 23:24 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@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 9001512008B for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 16:24:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 Uc_b8lNEfnpW for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 16:24:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl1-x633.google.com (mail-pl1-x633.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::633]) (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 36D47120018 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 16:24:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl1-x633.google.com with SMTP id ay6so108230plb.9 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 02 Jul 2019 16:24:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=0jsB4+7qgvr4DVUhQaG8/3JnT1VfKe2lS0QwGGAHASs=; b=ogRyte/DRBavmKULe/bPKrNRVsXCiTAZ+gc1kBmtwIcq7nUnMMka+EKfHVaz9sX2om a9sA+Ejif4GSWnmxwfHGo0zazIKbpQOnCmugVskhNGNiWKFR+mZUncaG3EgoaeWoRjc3 aGCuFphosdRxElRJIo06Ftcl0wTN3WDsKRI0OqUpKhXOvbXrej1ayWfw9eO6K8NF5C/s /eKsJblqHp4uoA1jvFRyPdmBA5NS0dVTrjKRmUEyiNpn6NDyJYdtnkwYXilLbVPTWTR+ hEMTh07f5IQ6x941fAlL8AqrTDyhs+Ja03he77ssjGwa8QSEkBWwVNVYp/8jLSq8+MtU pQ1Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=0jsB4+7qgvr4DVUhQaG8/3JnT1VfKe2lS0QwGGAHASs=; b=hLyy/zBrLhVVpBgBluFNfKknUmtWtRaBiE7nUHqbyk/Xf8iVqXAgvwwEwPO2eLgt1D HQeukEkZwILU31H3gxJz0LY6g5qglflJxCZ6K/49TqHRkU7gjCuRrTT9ZaCGMGx+n4kK 4XdxbQOTwcfF+jm+/u84SgZblIvZskPopbnWJ8xyOx0HMVy5i7aeWClxzYDAOQKrMve1 6+uQv5arI9LqWlHr1+BCYbFkNrn4ntYzCTUDYy0Se1uA1x1DE24znTv8EdIpFxIxCuM9 4xITuWSDTtgonkioTzvBUQBLk7h19mOrbABQ/a63FStavgJd36mesJM6w6l1qFI6dqTl eUZg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVc8AVLxg87KUf2R10RfbMFMT2cI45vTwkleAy6Bs70OR1O53k2 FUVj+EtOMtCIvh1cNedb6euwMdB3
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwg6ldRVD7MNd3G4xSklPSHXna8Lqv5OU/B4MNH3YDY/JzXOUsS3yhVXgfsMM5BuFpgF6AWMw==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:3225:: with SMTP id y34mr37323501plb.135.1562109849305; Tue, 02 Jul 2019 16:24:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.30] (32.23.255.123.dynamic.snap.net.nz. [123.255.23.32]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 14sm165011pfy.40.2019.07.02.16.24.07 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 02 Jul 2019 16:24:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: RFC8064 implemented in linux ?
To: Martin Hunek <martin.hunek@tul.cz>, ipv6@ietf.org
References: <69fb7b6e-cb0b-34a8-9a36-006878787282@gmail.com> <cc5275b0-99ae-0df8-d3e5-4a94c71c6895@gmail.com> <CAO42Z2wSRL0AsjsGY9g1L1A-Xs1--9JwfjGqAcDj3H5jov-_=A@mail.gmail.com> <1655927.slGzPW2NJu@rumburak.ite.tul.cz>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <576a3d68-c6f2-9294-44b3-84a0bdfeecb9@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2019 11:24:07 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1655927.slGzPW2NJu@rumburak.ite.tul.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/6d2WaI-u-j9nmxf7HCI5YJch_wY>
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, 02 Jul 2019 23:24:11 -0000

On 03-Jul-19 04:00, Martin Hunek wrote:

> When client's router start using RFC8064, the operator have just one choice adapt to new situation or stop providing IPv6 service to such clients. It is simply making IPv6 deployment harder as you can no longer use information you have from IPv4 deployment - the MAC address.

Since the client is in any case free to manually configure any static address they want, you really can't assume that Modified EUI-64 is used anyway. So I think the only safe solution is to extract the MAC address from the neighbor cache.

    Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email