Re: [v6ops] How do you solve 3GPP issue if neither operator nor handset supports PD?

"Templin (US), Fred L" <> Wed, 25 November 2020 14:36 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59F633A145C for <>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:36:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5vpRj0ANBmxM for <>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:36:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C7AD3A0C45 for <>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:36:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (8.15.2/8.15.2/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id 0APEa4K3027498; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 09:36:04 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=boeing-s1912; t=1606314965; bh=PxXqg16aGMaJIAqx8Xy+MrQSLYrygZN/QaTZpaxT0zE=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:From; b=crxG/d0/hOPQdCNlMBYOCh4WEVp15tkireyfQHFKJoqBqgwqc3iw5aysNGo2tGsVW T2HyMZRIMlt5XMA7xKFxP6+gwef8Q0nfAzKZXd9zAM4lRwxLi9j1fE3zzw7eKRt9Y0 3GEbh0OUkkEaLSONDFoV1CRup0uVndNjcu2GPLZWLhNpiJS8xnr6NAysiBfLkFEpi4 IRJTgoZ1EsKJWuC5+i3hWTE/WXL6WDLOjg+IIfSsGiEQ82y3TVPVKgMQ3GOY2YDOhc ZZy8k2KL4STCRlPmnfxjogQ0ddyrj7G9OTw27ZSqBbRM38vJT5MrDzEGKbWfA3OiZT Lc0KbTlLeNjvA==
Received: from ( []) by (8.15.2/8.15.2/8.15.2/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTPS id 0APEZttf027043 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 25 Nov 2020 09:35:56 -0500
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.1.2044.4; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:35:54 -0800
Received: from ([fe80::1522:f068:5766:53b5]) by ([fe80::1522:f068:5766:53b5%2]) with mapi id 15.01.2044.004; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:35:54 -0800
From: "Templin (US), Fred L" <>
To: Philip Homburg <>, "" <>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] How do you solve 3GPP issue if neither operator nor handset supports PD?
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] How do you solve 3GPP issue if neither operator nor handset supports PD?
Thread-Index: AdbDOEZ74Lub7t3bVESvC0PbrYUO2A==
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:35:53 +0000
Message-ID: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
x-tm-snts-smtp: 8088721387ABB4894A0CF7C8C307CDAF120FEFD664314B2E3D16A08E73B896A62000:8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:36:08 -0000


> -----Original Message-----
> From: [] On Behalf Of Philip Homburg
> Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2020 4:08 AM
> To:
> Cc: Templin (US), Fred L <>
> Subject: Re: [v6ops] How do you solve 3GPP issue if neither operator nor handset supports PD?
> > Philip, obviously I do
> > not agree to your position and ask that you have a further
> > consideration of the "LLA Type" draft. IPv6 interfaces may assign
> > multiple IPv6 addresses, and even multiple IPv6 link-local address
> > which may be created by multiple means (e.g., RFC4941(bis), RFC7217,
> > RFC3972, admin config, OMNI etc.).  By placing a "Type" code in
> > bits 56-63 of the LLA the different types can be differentiated
> > without there being a chance for mutual interference or collisions
> > that might require DAD.
> That doesn't make any sense to me. Outside OMNI, this type of interference
> just doesn't exist.

Oh no? On interfaces that want to do both RFC4941(bis) and RFC7217, and
possibly also RFC3972?

> If it does, then please give numbers. How often does adding the flag prevent
> interference or collisions outside OMNI? Did anyone ever spotted interference
> between different types of addresses on ethernet?

It is not a numbers-proof question; it is an enabling function question. All
IPv6 interfaces may assign multiple IPv6 addresses, and even multiple LLAs
which could be of different types. It will provide good future functionality
to be able to ascertain the type by checking a Type field.

> I can see how it is an issue for OMNI, but that just means that OMNI is
> broken.


> > Then, by also including a Prefix Length
> > value in bits 48-55 of the LLA we can have a PD exchange without
> > having to include any form of PIO* in the RS/RA message, which
> > saves some bits over low-end links.
> Compression for low-bandwidth links should be done in IPv6-over-foo documents,
> not as general changes to the architecture.
> In particular, we are discussing prefix delegation in mobile networks,
> which as not low-end by any sensible definition of low-end.

We will want this to work well over links with data rates as low as 32Kbps.
We will also want to minimize the number of messages on any link types.
This satisfies both requirements.

> > Finally, when the mobile node
> > gets its prefix delegation its LLA encodes the prefix so that PD
> > and IPv6 ND are inherently linked instead of having to map the PD
> > to some other form of LLA through a lookup table.
> This seems to be a bogus argument to me. The router needs to map the GUA
> prefix to an outgoing interface, so you get the link-local next hop for free.
> A transmission function on a point-to-point interface doesn't a next hop
> unless you run NUD on the link, which as far as I know, mobile doesn't.

What you are missing is that this links IPv6 ND to IPv6 forwarding in a way
that is very convenient for implementations. For example, a router can
determine the IPv6 next hop by examining the neighbor's link-local
address without having to do a forwarding table lookup. This has a
corresponding reduction in the amount of code needed in routers.  It
is also possible to deduce the LLA of a neighbor having only a GUA, i.e.,
IPv6 ND can be keyed on a GUA. I have coded this, and there is a
significant savings of code.