Re: 64share v2

Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> Wed, 11 November 2020 15:16 UTC

Return-Path: <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.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 9FA2A3A07A0 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:16:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.67
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.67 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 3fSy2sQ3JhZj for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:16:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.13]) (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 82AB43A0E66 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:16:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by oxalide-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 0ABFG1oI022408 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 16:16:01 +0100
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 7C7CD2047B4 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 16:16:01 +0100 (CET)
Received: from muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.12]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7121A2047C6 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 16:16:01 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [10.11.240.33] ([10.11.240.33]) by muguet1-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 0ABFG1p9021202 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 16:16:01 +0100
Subject: Re: 64share v2
To: ipv6@ietf.org
References: <CAD6AjGR-NE_sJ_jp7nAT6OvNkcdE9qoWuGEiiVW7r9YtsQvbbw@mail.gmail.com> <43ebd660-3df6-bc9c-2ef3-bbfd72a64229@gmail.com> <CAD6AjGQRyDDhVtunyCrWDBABG576oi=5xd1Lmz5=QicOJ6YsNA@mail.gmail.com> <d591a034-b629-cf6a-8211-b9243528db79@gmail.com> <CAD6AjGQaMCS+T-6pV=c7M_DL=qCYSdqrsemE8vUYYyqm5Rv32A@mail.gmail.com> <9dd54921-372f-f029-41ec-8eb00c12158f@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr05C_rbzigG8H3TbF3NkGg6oj7L4+LVtASdVmpdZ2Aaeg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2ada5c42-8afe-8b04-9bd0-0cfaf63a0cb8@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 16:16:00 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.4.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr05C_rbzigG8H3TbF3NkGg6oj7L4+LVtASdVmpdZ2Aaeg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: fr
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/FScktRw8O98-p8pnj_h8fjc2EVo>
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: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 15:16:07 -0000


Le 11/11/2020 à 10:31, Lorenzo Colitti a écrit :
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 9:01 AM Brian E Carpenter 
> <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com <mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>>
> wrote:
> 
> This memo requests the 3GPP to change this requirement to allow any 
> prefix size less than or equal to 64 be advertised by the 3GPP 
> gateway RA. It also, for this purpose only, overrides the 
> implication of [RFC 4291] and [RFC 4861] that subnet prefixes in RAs
> are always /64.
> 
> 
> I think that if we want to gain consensus on this document, we should
>  avoid overriding/updating/touching RFC 4291.
> 
> Fortunately I don't think we need to. We can simply do as Ole
> suggested and have the RA contain both the /64 PIO and a new option
> conveying the delegated prefix. We need to continue to maintain the
> /64 PIO anyway.

I can say that I like such a proposal because it involves a prefix
delegation concept in RA, an RA-PD, and I co-authored a draft about it
and there might be an implementation hidden somewhere in some archives.

I must say I am happy to hear that.

At the same time, I think GGSN would not implement RA-PD.  The proposal
64share-v2 seems by just modifying the existing /64 parameter in the RA.
  To remind, it was said "a tweak of the 3gpp spec to allow RA < 64 and a
UE mechanism to break that prefix into many 64s".

It says a tweak in spec and an UE mechanism.

It does not say a GGSN mechanism.

So, while we can indeed discuss many possible ways out, I would
re-verify what we want to do.

> If we don't, otherwise existing devices won't get IPv6 connectivity,
> since they know that a PIO with a /60 isn't valid for autoconf (even
> if A=1), because for global space, IIDs are always 64 bits long.

I partially disagree.

Alex

> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative
> Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>