IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> Tue, 28 May 2019 08:44 UTC

Return-Path: <sander@steffann.nl>
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 1C7B31201C3 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 May 2019 01:44:42 -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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=steffann.nl
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 HxXLEYj8vyir for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 May 2019 01:44:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sintact.nl (mail.sintact.nl [IPv6:2001:9e0:803::6]) (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 D2C791201BB for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 May 2019 01:44:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86A9361; Tue, 28 May 2019 10:44:37 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=steffann.nl; h= references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:date:date :in-reply-to:x-mailer:from:from:subject:subject:mime-version :content-type:content-type:received:received; s=mail; t= 1559033074; bh=C5Y2GcEHD6CsizJz8c9vaeZKHnCUUvNLJUHoNNOMb0g=; b=S Eu/Iml3nKbu9Zs4JzbtXq3RSFlvQnsBYi99sJseXXl6a7qT8LLi+BNAbDiiJH50d dvrNaaT/op3Z5CxsA/EF8wP8bC+tuP+Wmw0g7q0lh9mA5RpFR6iWWj3qM+yUqiYv N+6u3W2T34DV4GhwzE4DcSjWdlhjjnccvRry6rNAQM=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.sintact.nl
Received: from mail.sintact.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.sintact.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id 1E2RKcavYpW9; Tue, 28 May 2019 10:44:34 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [IPv6:2a02:a213:a300:ce80:7475:2673:c44e:79cb] (unknown [IPv6:2a02:a213:a300:ce80:7475:2673:c44e:79cb]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2802D5A; Tue, 28 May 2019 10:44:34 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: Confirmation to advance: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6only-flag-05
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
From: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (16F156)
In-Reply-To: <CAO42Z2ycyMP4vAM+emyVqsF9GLvzpk1Jf6g-dHL4YOUc_iNzqg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 10:44:33 +0200
Cc: David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <359DAB5C-B700-45BC-944E-DA1BF2B01B6A@steffann.nl>
References: <F8BFFCAD-E58E-4736-8A1C-56579B6F6032@employees.org> <232c1a43-0fd9-4eae-737b-260a3906f72a@gmail.com> <663F6C0B-7B8A-4088-B9C0-B2867B0C3EB8@gmail.com> <CAN-Dau3VJN7qNHAW-yStMrDRCa4vsDs2ObkAxswnYbcHde2t_w@mail.gmail.com> <m1hPqHO-0000J8C@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <CAN-Dau3R=4JbcbK7tWkJKYzVjq7DvAAEjVsbCLbZdYYO8OJ0YA@mail.gmail.com> <m1hQ7Dm-0000M3C@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <CAN-Dau040j6U+1CCn0QJiVMy2nVShHqqSFdCkM-FbMAH-2wjRA@mail.gmail.com> <m1hQCYr-0000KBC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <561d9dc3-c769-c774-8f65-f975ac2a10a0@gont.com.ar> <m1hT1DZ-0000HEC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <ce07ade8-5105-055f-4798-f4ef20a2393c@si6networks.com> <CAN-Dau02MYCrKx2BgyuYJeHBdoz6SHCnp+-byM+LMM8af0S+rA@mail.gmail.com> <40e99171-6dda-29e3-6152-da5ca5219ed9@foobar.org> <CAN-Dau0ALqfAA-Dz56oHAfOtY7E2obx5E7TgoeH357Mckp3t9g@mail.gmail.com> <093ba8e2-6f0a-4c91-9df1-cda33fffea97@foobar.org> <CAN-Dau3kVqb+ZEHB7iPGeRuq1Mu8UHR3FEZv8SgmiqZexaFhuA@mail.gmail.com> <12db9629-f92a-e12a-5ff1-7db2c5d2137e@foobar.org> <F6F0C9DC -545E-4FE5-BB4C-55BB29022E84@steffann.nl> <CAO42Z2yUDi3FHOZsLrHqwLsEWkB1X9FREa8m6dU6ecOr=SsX4g@mail.gmail.com> <E51102E7-D4F0-4469-8888-5072F624EE06@steffann.nl> <CAO42Z2ycyMP4vAM+emyVqsF9GLvzpk1Jf6g-dHL4YOUc_iNzqg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/AVt8c_wauTkrvAX8RJVNaa3EFQw>
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: Tue, 28 May 2019 08:44:42 -0000

Hi Mark,

> I think the impact of link-layer broadcasts on battery life is going
> to be pretty similar to that of multicast RAs that are also link-layer
> flooded to all-nodes, as they both have to be passed up to the general
> purpose OS and CPU for processing.

This is incorrect. RAs are constantly repeated. A single DHCP discover followed by a RFC2563 response is much less common and will therefore have much less impact.

> A link with DHCPv4 and RFC2563 is an "IPv6 Mostly" link, not an "IPv6 Only" link.

Literally true, but practically and operationally an insignificant distinction.

> Doesn't solve the problem of hosts needlessly, wastefully and
> persistently trying to acquire IPv4 addresses that they'll never get.
> 
> It's making hosts into hamsters in wheels, activity with no progress.

Hosts that persistently keep asking for IPv4 leases despite being told "no" can be fixed much easier than by adding a new flag to IPv6... And hosts that keep misbehaving can't be expected to implement the flag either.

Cheers,
Sander

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email