IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Generic anycast addresses...

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Thu, 30 May 2019 22:16 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.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 69B471200CC for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 May 2019 15:16:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=fugue-com.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 UIOHKF8HVIhI for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 May 2019 15:16:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf1-x431.google.com (mail-pf1-x431.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::431]) (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 4B3C0120004 for <6man@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 May 2019 15:16:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf1-x431.google.com with SMTP id c9so1565716pfc.11 for <6man@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 May 2019 15:16:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=CAwp77mI83eDcYAOdxR3JE5WiYpR0zwQgjLId9ZfFEQ=; b=Wv8U0Q/RfZfuHiv1eW9t2moIfrQCN+6B+pQGaL0+82Z3rzJfWA8POojmkGNpAV/I0z nBETIcwhrUGs5t/2xBku6tzChEVFFhlc0WIt3EKcgn50RYw+DNamp1wAZ5xtazNqjN2o B9Ya8MvPn3wA8EK6qCLFBXTHcpyVALx7LnQ2hD9sAoNxJ2dt2klQhWx6vopefXEm61B4 aY4Noo3x/+YkjTEnBPJOcXUIPTISpWbSBKPK4ZCIt+Jof3vcRB+rPgtXa5C35ZRXBCb9 MchvtO+IvaHZJfOfAMGys3YVeHWH2f6X9/3JPrVLy90NXM/wxXgbf7jEQYfU8Hm5e4m0 0iLw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=CAwp77mI83eDcYAOdxR3JE5WiYpR0zwQgjLId9ZfFEQ=; b=E1ECigUQ80D8XHbea/3D8RWof+ICG4dDT30602fE9o97EVOS4+EAifYoK0nX+10QJA eUrEm593udu+nj5PXx1WQerfwSpg65zPIFjFioKlC0+eena9yg2civX2GBXchYnWIjaU SjNiWTlN1lR5dVfmBX0ihD9pRCl3v4HLoSYNvBFYd3LK6UJn7mkZsWdHugA/0ivml35/ iM6PKSNFRgEJvt4x1gJNpPQ+xhKrVCaEfI5zCwu/n+/NGflKfYFf/wPfrZGfva67yrW0 7Zh9VgfbR955r6BLuOdyHWikvTpd1LmS0HJWSnhswpYAijySdMm49+VkmgJZKseZuBu6 Qo0g==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV0NxyMXnTMwjF5wZf6BLAr7CCtKSTuLfC+mLktEDN2Piixdrtu b0jxPLEEoWSG7sw5pSi7qbI+Kw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxJvyz2Lethm3h1qykPhsv24nDmNqA/pfyb3BLq2rfZg52ML3Un9H9KEIDVdbSD6lENEYFc4A==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:a789:: with SMTP id f9mr5483660pjq.20.1559254561711; Thu, 30 May 2019 15:16:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [17.230.172.14] ([17.230.172.14]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r1sm4612962pfg.65.2019.05.30.15.16.00 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 30 May 2019 15:16:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Message-Id: <632BE7EC-26A6-44E9-9CCD-F0AE143D4256@fugue.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_61977A1D-2B4E-4BAB-8E9F-EC45A9E1C3E1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
Subject: Re: Generic anycast addresses...
Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 15:15:59 -0700
In-Reply-To: <20190530220838.g2hshonsjxmfnd55@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>, Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com>
To: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
References: <7A9560FC-0393-45DF-8389-B868455AC6DD@fugue.com> <20190530005734.7d2alod2zoaemmhc@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <D6E27B45-437F-45BE-A305-47DD460BCE02@fugue.com> <26144.1559226966@localhost> <1DD451A7-D898-4105-974C-53776A3DA9F2@fugue.com> <20190530152902.l2nmyhadr4e4kt7x@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <0FF19D6D-1A45-41EF-BE34-CC35B5E51E1E@steffann.nl> <D91629F6-73AC-4A80-80EF-16644F73DA36@fugue.com> <701687d4-842c-6a16-3c97-349125324e3f@gmail.com> <D648647D-60E1-4DCE-B0BE-11002E0AE5A4@fugue.com> <20190530220838.g2hshonsjxmfnd55@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/8Lbz0omYefmVOlTijOKWtQnizbw>
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, 30 May 2019 22:16:03 -0000

On May 30, 2019, at 3:08 PM, Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> wrote:
> To me, a non-fuzzy boundary is one where you do something like ACL on
> a set of links completely isolating some area of the network. Fuzzy
> could vbe absence of default route causing ULA to stop. Not sure if
> these are good examples of any actual definition, but both ae possible with
> ULA.
> 
> I'd mostly be concerned about non-fuzzy boundaries wrt. security,
> so not sure if i'd always want to avoid non-fuzzy boundaries.

The question is, what’s different about the proposed application versus typical ULA usage?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email