IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Deprecating IPv6 (Re: draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6-00)

james woodyatt <jhw@google.com> Wed, 07 June 2017 18:42 UTC

Return-Path: <jhw@google.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 0885B12F29A for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 11:42:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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=google.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 ldlV8ls9ThZz for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 11:42:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf0-x236.google.com (mail-pf0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::236]) (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 6EC0313145C for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 11:41:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf0-x236.google.com with SMTP id 9so8562755pfj.1 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 07 Jun 2017 11:41:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=from:mime-version:subject:date:references:to:in-reply-to:message-id; bh=CNwpmBROMkJe0TrrdwMwBFMEZbQQLyFN0IZgSufIe4U=; b=BO0Umcgjcasng6HzQre9mtIwbceMdxtvSlnWwwT24ahVQ9bhIAntndcqP98D5+iGDe hJ71lBorswQhtWCDvH9xh5WPILVL3XDRMYcjfetfcLQcse7lhgUIJXvFavvcCt2zt2x1 7NIAFDgE4P2bFnCiHjruL2HPS56mqBWz34uyc5faRZcTGfMqVYxFuYaChhjc9bldbfAL aP5I1aEeowY7suMpRswNManK33r5pEQ9jE7rwLJm5YUj85bdC4pFc4m1YyVRqNLUoZMb +ZQhKfwE2dV/GYoLo45rp6mk8/UllFdtnUhD/PQBgf4ycszHvRPL+xsb8750LdcPW9aG J1xg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:subject:date:references:to :in-reply-to:message-id; bh=CNwpmBROMkJe0TrrdwMwBFMEZbQQLyFN0IZgSufIe4U=; b=Rn1JNfWx9yUzGwHVKQ8YJZRQLD8V548VrbvXhj1ZreCpXHrE9gZb6w2X1kdzYgcB0C yCZaH+IYTNfJrgajxM33Gr27VyHnA2RS6Om3QXlLuE3Y3HChnn2a5+z58MLS5cKbTF5W xSIrtk1+qA5MU160jsPPcquCky+uqTF3bjdL7CkiD74/M/zOS+XxNbhPHCShAYUovpLb 5aPTkHS0+IHksE7AdkwA5TznJg48LaYGC6hogjCWLZu/GdkK27LezAO85k+TMN0GGb0m xPB95qOpwHHSk24XZWmAMUnuzqiowKeza1AnxLey1QLpD8xCwwo2EaKXG0YQzkwjG1tI zPiQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcDLcOX7p3AVwbx6lB04nPIDTvYaJ3oHXomlNhqpIVVyXCgWh7XZ BB6q6Si3Y+U5UfVb7oR+wg==
X-Received: by 10.84.133.3 with SMTP id 3mr29631227plf.283.1496860884758; Wed, 07 Jun 2017 11:41:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2620::10e7:10:c04e:499a:a99:a8ba? ([2620:0:10e7:10:c04e:499a:a99:a8ba]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z64sm5242628pfd.20.2017.06.07.11.41.23 for <ipv6@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 07 Jun 2017 11:41:24 -0700 (PDT)
From: james woodyatt <jhw@google.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_FFB0776E-F501-4462-8F23-D9C84AE7B10C"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Subject: Re: Deprecating IPv6 (Re: draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6-00)
Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2017 11:41:23 -0700
References: <CAO42Z2wp72j-yOsR8C=iqS+dX14wLwthAtOTvD5ugj_NQ=NQag@mail.gmail.com> <8be34ef8-557f-652e-0d2f-f1a1e008bffd@gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1706050827290.17963@uplift.swm.pp.se> <E2B77C58-B235-49D6-8130-0B41BE55899C@google.com> <CAAedzxrkbywKMmUaZ6-OCunXe1sw=q3+TNz278xZDmdsQm3xaw@mail.gmail.com> <93C6138E-A2EE-4005-8C16-05E2A2DEA661@google.com> <CAKD1Yr3+pHFhCwoL4vbQLDQ3PNGpijci8c7eZM=Gb0oTy9C0XA@mail.gmail.com>
To: 6man <ipv6@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr3+pHFhCwoL4vbQLDQ3PNGpijci8c7eZM=Gb0oTy9C0XA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-Id: <8678F73D-2CCD-4781-9947-8C07182DFAF4@google.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/8NC-52hix4wb5q6we6kI-0uNmk8>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Wed, 07 Jun 2017 18:42:55 -0000

On Jun 7, 2017, at 01:53, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 4:06 AM, james woodyatt <jhw@google.com <mailto:jhw@google.com>> wrote:
> p1. Power conservative ND Proxy isn’t possible with Thread™ 1.1 (and earlier) networks. It may never be possible in future versions of Thread™.
> 
> Can you explain to us why it doesn't work? One might naively think that if the BR is doing NAT for hosts behind it, it has to process a similar packets as it would have to process if it were doing ND.


Thread™ 1.1 doesn’t even use RFC 4861 much less RFC 6775. A proxy for RFC 4861 at the Thread™ 1.1 border router would require DAD and NUD to be translated into prohibitively expensive multicast floods into the mesh. Use of IPv6/NAT allows the border router to make an entire Thread™ mesh reach the public Internet via the one stable IPv6 address that is reliably available on all residential networks with IPv6 providers.

For years, we have been hoping that HOMENET would address the basic problem here, but now that it's clear the forthcoming update to RFC 7084 will not recommend adoption of the HOMENET protocol suite in IPv6 CPE residential gateways, Thread™ has no other option than to recommend IPv6/NAT to cope with operational reality.


--james woodyatt <jhw@google.com <mailto:jhw@google.com>>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email