Re: draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6-00

Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> Sun, 04 June 2017 04:51 UTC

Return-Path: <tom@herbertland.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 8E0B0126CBF for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 21:51:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 VNwz8knvog0H for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 21:51:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr0-x22e.google.com (mail-wr0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4373C1200CF for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 21:51:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id g76so23399872wrd.1 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 03 Jun 2017 21:51:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=0lTv+zY/MM6CgCswxcXDZt7wzNNrbwu3pvpnxwjzXlo=; b=zY/qKsaFf0IMMgdfQuoYEnHLPCscA8Hex+LPczUSOhh3CLoZRR74f2RDGiiittGqI7 Iz6D1wihNjMtOl608Al3GSOTmCNrhru1nDc0KwMxo2wEtMdiITbEBmO/1pKia5uFPpMe eTtMPSTYnppbUkZdR7s4dXm0x9RHCzvIqej+9AcWx2XIIohwoVr1SvOEQIpI9UGBOgt3 mS51FZyWbBZkBn7GObNllHQP0s0Di7ZmARHVhthMwwqA1aOQfIX2QeG1XsLzZEr+Z6+n KN79NxabX3Q5yiI/TjSr8PKL+xJ7EbqzxmBUcirg5hdp6KfhNW0QchsoYi0WpyaJsIK/ tCAg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=0lTv+zY/MM6CgCswxcXDZt7wzNNrbwu3pvpnxwjzXlo=; b=fVsiXG+qjzyQJSYpqn42s/WCXR2QZpSNZ2UMOiEvF34qd+qJTon/nEuqxQ8ajea6Cj nCl2Br3Q+ZlJRaFqQW6V+GfGGsgRTpboWh3c+ha6Nmx8Ix7MUk8jzz22CJvmVRSjCfPX 6Vbc5JAk0UbCw+AxFdE7C24ZDqV48JrF31oVmEzwx2COpRonzJHFVDmHtW1UkyDyMmCz jEeuvxvXhf4jr0r1xAvAso2Y0dgx51O7LHinDVCrvKwF1yCDYqFRsOUZVD/4tjdqcWZ4 TphU2lbnjrTdOhZ+x7XwISJt2ckVWB1HoHVWLSEy61hM99PMv2MnoNqQeR4x+WFhnOUA u19A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcCBKcNJltzR2fRtgvNXdmrYefuhRlIoasbPYNoA8bwCfQ1Ydl06 tf5JTc60KsMz8LvERPgXIIZDdFyt4E6M
X-Received: by 10.223.166.196 with SMTP id t62mr8998087wrc.52.1496551902557; Sat, 03 Jun 2017 21:51:42 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.132.135 with HTTP; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 21:51:41 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr3HkiAweix3fhxT2+9moj7eP2AGRtf7hESpOKihKMCUOg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20170602141112.x64nleqclygz7dwd@Vurt.local> <CALx6S34y1ZS95dD6Qv5A90RnKwh2NqC=VDaZ2vSq+zpo5+NpUg@mail.gmail.com> <5932DA16.9040008@foobar.org> <CAKD1Yr3HkiAweix3fhxT2+9moj7eP2AGRtf7hESpOKihKMCUOg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2017 21:51:41 -0700
Message-ID: <CALx6S36b_8z2_vi4T8ZNKs72v5rKAR9YpBWz+r+xb-J-yO4sfQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6-00
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Cc: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>, "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/HfBHUE6XYfrgAtNCNQMQFeyVhGY>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 04 Jun 2017 04:51:45 -0000

On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 6:35 PM, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 4, 2017 at 12:47 AM, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:
>>
>> let's say your device is assigned a /64, e.g. either on a mobile network
>> or via PD.  Your device sits between upstream and downstream devices and
>> passes traffic between upstream and downstream.
>
>
> No, Tom wants to assign a device a /96 or a /104. He wants the network to
> use the middle bits for mobility.

Lorenzo,

That's correct. Consider use case for mobility would be a for a device
that is a front end to a network, for example a bus driving down the
road has offers WIFI to passengers. To use identifier/locator split
addressing (ILA or ILNP) for mobility in this case we need

M bits for locator of physical device in mobile network
N bits for identifier of physical device
128 - M - N bits for delegated addresses by the physical device

I don't see a workable solution if device is assigned a /64. Am I
missing something?

Tom