RE: Route Information Options in Redirect Messages (updated)
"Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> Thu, 09 February 2017 20:55 UTC
Return-Path: <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.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 15EB612946B for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Feb 2017 12:55:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.22
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.22 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, 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 3Q9n4PfEqxqn for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Feb 2017 12:55:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from phx-mbsout-02.mbs.boeing.net (phx-mbsout-02.mbs.boeing.net [130.76.184.179]) (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 79F46126D74 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Feb 2017 12:55:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phx-mbsout-02.mbs.boeing.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id v19KtpBU044064; Thu, 9 Feb 2017 13:55:51 -0700
Received: from XCH15-06-10.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch15-06-10.nw.nos.boeing.com [137.136.239.219]) by phx-mbsout-02.mbs.boeing.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id v19KterX043808 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 9 Feb 2017 13:55:41 -0700
Received: from XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com (2002:8988:eede::8988:eede) by XCH15-06-10.nw.nos.boeing.com (2002:8988:efdb::8988:efdb) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Thu, 9 Feb 2017 12:55:39 -0800
Received: from XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com ([137.136.238.222]) by XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com ([137.136.238.222]) with mapi id 15.00.1263.000; Thu, 9 Feb 2017 12:55:39 -0800
From: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
To: 神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp>
Subject: RE: Route Information Options in Redirect Messages (updated)
Thread-Topic: Route Information Options in Redirect Messages (updated)
Thread-Index: AdJ8F7CvYW0JrWzvRzOTQSlLsXA0KQA/bwYAACZxdWAA79nnKQAAmI2QAHUG9YAAC9NOUA==
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2017 20:55:39 +0000
Message-ID: <9db702dd473540a59b49b877724b5f1b@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com>
References: <9910b4acd87044e89fad83bb5c795b77@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com> <CAJE_bqfJMW5SRDxm04rC67Xvf4YqaxihyCRUXfGW3TUq42Xk-A@mail.gmail.com> <5ebd374f4ec8454b8a3796cffe5e1919@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com> <CAJE_bqfN9x031TXBd8Hpiv5168=zXXN+U02gGqsxyXhpQ-SDWA@mail.gmail.com> <E291D7B9-7492-4043-BE4F-E45CB54985D7@google.com> <CAJE_bqePL1bKAZL53=oebn=2eiYKdxyULd5jS4uJk9jo1sFrcA@mail.gmail.com> <614ead862aa54a548ed4835a998a42e4@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com> <CAJE_bqf2Vc9nocdh+Y-fDj_nLL4-b-W=ysb8raCFg2Qj6k6wBA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJE_bqf2Vc9nocdh+Y-fDj_nLL4-b-W=ysb8raCFg2Qj6k6wBA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [137.136.248.6]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/6pHtrc46A90aX5CEXGVgupyeON8>
Cc: james woodyatt <jhw@google.com>, IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Thu, 09 Feb 2017 20:55:54 -0000
Hi Jinmei-san, > -----Original Message----- > From: jinmei.tatuya@gmail.com [mailto:jinmei.tatuya@gmail.com] On Behalf Of ???? > Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2017 10:27 AM > To: Templin, Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> > Cc: james woodyatt <jhw@google.com>; IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org> > Subject: Re: Route Information Options in Redirect Messages (updated) > > At Tue, 7 Feb 2017 18:43:12 +0000, > "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> wrote: > > > > BTW, if this proposal keeps the concept of "unsolicited redirect" and > > > also allows the destination address of '::' to bypass the host's > > > validity check of whether it's really the first hop router for the > > > destination, > > > > No, that is not what we want to have happen. The document doesn't > > say this currently, but we want to retain a revised version of the validity > > check. The revised version of the check would say: > > > > OLD: > > - The IP source address of the Redirect is the same as the current > > first-hop router for the specified ICMP Destination Address. > > > > NEW: > > - The IP source address of the Redirect is the same as the current > > first-hop router for the specified ICMP Destination Address, or > > (when the ICMP Destination Address is '::') the same as the current > > first-hop router for the specified RIOs > > > > Would welcome better wording than this, but we definitely do want > > to retain the validity check. Comments? > > Okay, I now understand the intent. In that case I think the > validation logic (currently described in Section 3.1) will have to be > more detailed. It will also have to cover some corner cases such as > where some of RIOs contain pass the above validation but some others > don't. I would rather have the validation check say that, if any of the RIOs (among possibly multiple) fail the check then the entire Redirect message also fails the check. > Similarly, I guess it should specify which RIOs can be > accepted by the receiving host in general (e.g., when the destination > address is 2001:db8:a::1, should the host accept an RIO for > 2001:db8:b::/48?). To avoid this ambiguity, I would prefer to require that the destination address MUST be set to "::" IFF any RIOs are included. That way, legacy implementations that don't understand RIOs will reject the Redirect because it doesn't include a valid destination address, while new implementations will process the Redirect by ignoring the destination address and parsing all included RIOs. Thanks - Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com > -- > JINMEI, Tatuya
- Route Information Options in Redirect Messages (u… Templin, Fred L
- Re: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… 神明達哉
- RE: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… Templin, Fred L
- Re: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… 神明達哉
- Re: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… Mark Smith
- Re: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… Lorenzo Colitti
- RE: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… Templin, Fred L
- RE: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… Templin, Fred L
- RE: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… Templin, Fred L
- Re: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… james woodyatt
- Re: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… james woodyatt
- Re: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… 神明達哉
- RE: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… Templin, Fred L
- RE: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… Mark Smith
- RE: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… Templin, Fred L
- Re: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… james woodyatt
- RE: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… Mark Smith
- RE: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… Templin, Fred L
- Re: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… Mark Smith
- RE: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… Templin, Fred L
- RE: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… Mark Smith
- RE: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… Templin, Fred L
- Re: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… 神明達哉
- RE: Route Information Options in Redirect Message… Templin, Fred L