Re: Embedding IP information in an IPv6 address (OMNI)

"Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> Thu, 15 October 2020 19:41 UTC

Return-Path: <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.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 C8CD53A1333; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 12:41:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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=boeing.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 tRTwDYLMThhc; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 12:41:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from clt-mbsout-02.mbs.boeing.net (clt-mbsout-02.mbs.boeing.net [130.76.144.163]) (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 A4DC83A1331; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 12:41:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by clt-mbsout-02.mbs.boeing.net (8.15.2/8.15.2/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id 09FJfB9Y013094; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 15:41:14 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=boeing.com; s=boeing-s1912; t=1602790874; bh=l4YGgIUIgkUh889et07AKz6yDUHlG/L+ttq3GZ8Hlzs=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:From; b=tbtLa6dRLR0DaB8plNYu3WWXvNa/vGrrizRAvwguFKDBMgjSw65BSYc4gbq1R3Csc 4gFEBUeYWI16WFLM85C7aFvd09Q1Ap1Ba5UWKOxc4Xv0zut+OaoOo3JhVObmLdzPE/ FY1ycTgJ5nNsk+S8SFsjpykdy0WT9dCB+6zZMzNSYtAxRJy/3srtdOse9EXu1GMQe6 cb5nILE8w9VqE2gCfu0n0+fZLB91GE7KxoC/xN4HtIwpOOkMFm9Yqk1T5jQbF5gaXL xkiGOgbJSi6E4LS5Q0um6ggz+8dtL5NlFh9NIiVmk1V/CatyTED29+Ju6g/oTADnks LkGtoj7iz7aGA==
Received: from XCH16-07-08.nos.boeing.com (xch16-07-08.nos.boeing.com [144.115.66.110]) by clt-mbsout-02.mbs.boeing.net (8.15.2/8.15.2/8.15.2/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTPS id 09FJew4j011725 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 15 Oct 2020 15:40:58 -0400
Received: from XCH16-07-10.nos.boeing.com (144.115.66.112) by XCH16-07-08.nos.boeing.com (144.115.66.110) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.1.2044.4; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 12:40:57 -0700
Received: from XCH16-07-10.nos.boeing.com ([fe80::1522:f068:5766:53b5]) by XCH16-07-10.nos.boeing.com ([fe80::1522:f068:5766:53b5%2]) with mapi id 15.01.2044.004; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 12:40:57 -0700
From: "Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
To: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
CC: =?utf-8?B?T2xlIFRyw7hhbg==?= <otroan@employees.org>, IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>, "atn@ietf.org" <atn@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Embedding IP information in an IPv6 address (OMNI)
Thread-Topic: Embedding IP information in an IPv6 address (OMNI)
Thread-Index: AdajKnkm6kRDBKobS0SrVaj++JwD+A==
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:40:57 +0000
Message-ID: <d17486583dc04bcab4098b286af60649@boeing.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [137.137.12.6]
x-tm-snts-smtp: A4004FDD59AB2AA1FBE13451D30BD96E4FD379CCCE0554B072231F95604CFEE02000:8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/CjknUkPyQtbqxZyZso31J9w4rQA>
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, 15 Oct 2020 19:41:19 -0000

Hi Bob,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Hinden [mailto:bob.hinden@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 12:24 PM
> To: Templin (US), Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
> Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>om>; Ole Trøan <otroan@employees.org>rg>; IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>rg>; atn@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Embedding IP information in an IPv6 address (OMNI)
> 
> Fred,
> 
> > On Oct 15, 2020, at 12:10 PM, Templin (US), Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> wrote:
> >
> > Bob,
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Bob Hinden [mailto:bob.hinden@gmail.com]
> >> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 11:43 AM
> >> To: Templin (US), Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
> >> Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>om>; Ole Trøan <otroan@employees.org>rg>; IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>rg>; atn@ietf.org
> >> Subject: Re: Embedding IP information in an IPv6 address (OMNI)
> >>
> >> Fred,
> >>
> >>> On Oct 15, 2020, at 11:40 AM, Templin (US), Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The use of site locals also sets limitations of addressing/routing in the underlay.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This is rather about addressing/routing in the *overlay*.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> With regards to performance. Is the conversion between SLA/LLA something you do per packet?
> >>>>>> If not, I'm unsure I see why optimising that is beneficial.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Per-packet - a simple bit-flip changes the address from SLA to LLA or vice-versa.
> >>>>
> >>>> Umm, that would break the transport protocol checksum.
> >>>
> >>> Good point, and that brings into focus the need for RFC2473 encapsulation.
> >>> If you want a packet with IPv6 link-local addresses (LLAs) to go more than
> >>> one hop, encapsulate it in an IPv6 header with the same LLAs and then
> >>> flip the bit to turn them into SLAs. Then, present the (encapsulated) packet
> >>> to the IPv6 overlay routing system.
> >>
> >> If you want the packets to go more than one hop, then don’t use link-local addresses.
> >
> > That circles us right back to the subject of how RFC4861 is intrinsically tied to
> > the use of link-local address and the fact that all IPv6 interfaces are required
> > to configure a unique link-local address. It would be a bear to try to change
> > that, so OMNI employs RFC2473 encapsulation instead of trying to override
> > the bedrock IPv6 standards. The use of RFC2473 encapsulation also brings
> > other important benefits.
> 
> Right, that how ND works.   Seems to me that you are proposing many changes to IPv6 for some degree of optimization.   It’s unclear
> to me that the benefit outweighs the cost.

Rather than repeating them again here, I would invite you to go back over the
message exchanges I had with Ole yesterday (10/14/2020) where I outlined the
benefits. About changes to IPv6, all that has been asked so far is for the OMNI
interface to define its own link-local addresses - having that, none of the IPv6
standards like RFC4861, RFC8200 etc. are changed.

Fred

> Bob
>