IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Confirmation to advance: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6only-flag-05

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Thu, 09 May 2019 23:01 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 4BBE5120126 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 May 2019 16:01:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 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_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 hmtgBfh8gXTp for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 May 2019 16:01:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf1-x436.google.com (mail-pf1-x436.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::436]) (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 4E0521200DE for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 May 2019 16:01:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf1-x436.google.com with SMTP id 10so2088556pfo.5 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 09 May 2019 16:01:16 -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=hJcxOV0uudTG67w5/0nzwH2wqQnFQ53bTFpThwAxOpA=; b=nUMgdQ3OJNGhe98GJOYNa9fncJ1rLeNoFVR88OOT6JAcfRPRS7R4ss5t9YrJrzJazy QCqxnwrQLA4nzjjiiIuE1z9dHgVpVD8pqL5RGOFdjn7lSxAJdU5yY+dcHL7jozIQNVas zt/fd58HJ/OWkvZI5UwIHJYeKXbAPL3YTUaJwRltLNcYUuhfIQVg5fN+djUa/UtTWtau xxh2rI8Q8G8KlM0BqaECfT+3fcOSsiovpra3PZ6cHRnNdIbPu2GOnZ77O9BrhCrfLEDa X78AckhCbPE53+r+mSOlaCLwNZvET2Jw+M9WdzuXnkezzL+64N6V8psw9Kl1qNYEehYr iIQw==
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=hJcxOV0uudTG67w5/0nzwH2wqQnFQ53bTFpThwAxOpA=; b=C7GyjzCqZR/FsHwWDZS9SMopp5fCN1m/OMdnZXK1cFpbMbgd/sS0eg4UevmlLd9+M5 ZwYQ/yhPx1cak3yCTbfnj2pmMpdkt3vd3YEufU7gELPSZIPn6bmTx5mVBsXcdTkjfvNu EhTDwbjaYQOl0/c+6vPtI1tFh877/4JB0Q4M+//xRnB+fOLcDiGoqUQT7XiPPCf7S1Qh D21gX/Es97h8+BfJjnNjGsWe3r53ecDcxxf71eMvDrS6B4tDOcuTFW6P3QTIxNC0MPnR DPJuIpY2ZfhReGBnJPlitM7CzlyinddABA5S9ZAfFifovEocrbLd8GGxGjDyBoYxv8Bk Jx3Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXOGnRRfiE1QqOGFjVT9jISh7FyrJIz0fdTFytAfXWykR19kM0+ iy5juA4FTvAQUOKNJ4tG+xK+gtp6
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzPojEiW0RMusjqOyT9Z6aq34UapXWdfrUap4Lbkg5nmcKWSbjA6DEyDOGi8z3fq6Kkt3GisA==
X-Received: by 2002:aa7:8c90:: with SMTP id p16mr9090488pfd.33.1557442875283; Thu, 09 May 2019 16:01:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.30] ([118.148.72.205]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r64sm8508400pfa.25.2019.05.09.16.01.13 for <ipv6@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 09 May 2019 16:01:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Confirmation to advance: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6only-flag-05
To: ipv6@ietf.org
References: <F8BFFCAD-E58E-4736-8A1C-56579B6F6032@employees.org> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1905091054560.1824@uplift.swm.pp.se> <m1hOfjp-0000IdC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <924a4e34-e5f9-9872-bd4a-c0f68fd5387f@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2019 11:01:12 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <m1hOfjp-0000IdC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/7C3xPLVgPbAtm_W2cwInnvjz6hI>
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: Thu, 09 May 2019 23:01:18 -0000

On 09-May-19 21:53, Philip Homburg wrote:
> In your letter dated Thu, 9 May 2019 11:08:03 +0200 (CEST) you wrote:
>> An attaching host will not start IPv4 operations until it has received 
>> (and decided it's received all of them) RA answers to its initial RS 
>> message, because before this it doesn't know what the flag will be. This 
>> will increase attachment times before a working setup can be had on IPv4 
>> only links. I think this is a valid concern.
> 
> I think the proponents of this draft should create an experimental 
> implementation in a mobile device (for example Andriod, but I guess a 
> laptop running Linux would work as well).

Then I think the proponents of every draft should create an experimental implementation for every operating system.

This style of argument could be used against every new proposal that we ever get.

    Brian
 
> And then actually try to attack that implementation and write both about
> implementation guidelines and security issues.
> 
> Much better would be to just drop this draft and move on. 
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email