IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: A common problem with SLAAC in "renumbering" scenarios

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Sun, 03 February 2019 17:14 UTC

Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
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 2935B126DBF; Sun, 3 Feb 2019 09:14:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.3
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=swm.pp.se
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 8VGRGoQwocjE; Sun, 3 Feb 2019 09:14:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (ipv6.swm.pp.se [IPv6:2a00:801::f]) (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 9A2411200D7; Sun, 3 Feb 2019 09:14:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 469D3AF; Sun, 3 Feb 2019 18:14:47 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1549214087; bh=t6DkcpI8CksIeGMuELuJ6SLwFizQpfJUv0z2qZQ5+Mo=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=QIls2svbQ5FBAnN/EMcdqglwtgPcL6HmqT0B3KuiA0hCQmTKFiM0t3ieI1M2u5N/2 sAWYexH4UIdV9C2bRO6XEMr3UwkMqgcCBn3MwRxAwNqLSyv9dLFMTbTO1yTCWjgLHd t1jf5VHGkswy3/5/Bei2XDbhhvIS+Tn4PS1KP9OU=
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 425AB9F; Sun, 3 Feb 2019 18:14:47 +0100 (CET)
Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2019 18:14:47 +0100
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>
cc: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, v6ops list <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: A common problem with SLAAC in "renumbering" scenarios
In-Reply-To: <CAO42Z2xzYQESqqsz4AEE89vx=AhvBEf8Yzyae9o7z1U1XYyarw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1902031813310.23912@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <60fabe4b-fd76-4b35-08d3-09adce43dd71@si6networks.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1901311236320.5601@uplift.swm.pp.se> <m1gpCcz-0000FlC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <ddd28787-8905-bafd-3546-2ceef436c8b0@si6networks.com> <m1gptWx-0000G3C@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <69609C58-7205-4519-B17A-4FBC8AE2EA16@employees.org> <ac773bb5-0da8-064b-d46b-3a218b8c9e7a@si6networks.com> <CFAEACC4-BA78-4DF9-AD8A-3EB0790B8000@employees.org> <a4f6742e-f18e-3384-d4cc-06bfab49101f@si6networks.com> <FEFA99C2-4F09-4D8F-8D51-C9D9D7090637@employees.org> <a484d5de-0dce-a41a-928e-785d8d80d05d@si6networks.com> <CAO42Z2xzYQESqqsz4AEE89vx=AhvBEf8Yzyae9o7z1U1XYyarw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/CBsEGTV_dqiS3J0HhbVNlSb-R6A>
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: Sun, 03 Feb 2019 17:14:52 -0000

On Mon, 4 Feb 2019, Mark Smith wrote:

> A first hop CPE rebooting and being given a different PD prefix is 
> effectively changing a transient packet loss event into the movement of

What about if it decides to choose a different /64 out of that /56? Do we 
cover this in any documents? The result to end systems is the same 
regardless if it's different /64 out of the /56 or if it's different /56.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email