IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPv6] next steps for draft-ietf-6man-ipv6-over-wireless

Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com> Thu, 25 May 2023 14:58 UTC

Return-Path: <sarikaya2012@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 9B61FC14CEED for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 May 2023 07:58:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.844
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.844 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, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sLHBV80hl-La for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 May 2023 07:58:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x42f.google.com (mail-wr1-x42f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42f]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC095C14F726 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 May 2023 07:58:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x42f.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-3093eb8cd1fso1570419f8f.1 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 May 2023 07:58:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1685026700; x=1687618700; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:reply-to:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=8/Y3w2tqzLxHQnEPCVhj5OZgjefiv0o4V9HFutfBlvQ=; b=aX4EKDAO0anuAjvvDJYzXM/Bfb0OIS0jEroCf7PzyT7h4WJ4BsBFDFWuJq+5cmP+hz XyeovFrIajDyxjV/Lfg78w8iPtlQunjyG7vThuAoptZ06P1mWElYYDM2jZIWFr59lqBj AYoNljl60iP+aTTFVS+knXhU5xuddJZ3QVMHGK07CaQKKQKzhPkiGgpk1yJ5r8EIXr41 eCa1QwKgT4KsaWjnPFW4y6uzZJf4lDQ4m3WfoByCDEF0BS2VWRkKdqvOqnzvUvPeGMqA s6B1Lav3GiFFZ8VL1sf77KUsRb/bidIwvcytrwsBN3nE1C2RYPVOYeun9YC8/uHJ/yK1 Gc3g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1685026700; x=1687618700; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:reply-to:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=8/Y3w2tqzLxHQnEPCVhj5OZgjefiv0o4V9HFutfBlvQ=; b=htB4zUkm3FT6GyMh4P38smXisRZpRnXFGUaaOoFrZ7lNDW/41XEC+eB55V3TsP9q+C +i0FOUUkYHYQbJbI5C5zhTxQL5hCUcoMjfSf6k7RUAgRe1RRQ5hMenl30lENA3ftexBE 4He9UnFzBxxWVlweri09yk3SpQ2nbNHykARAXdD5Rnjo/HobxlKXR58bInUTXO25o4lA cvVvbqJ8oTaoVvMXFqSL2qrGOuO+M4q8vMhO23S5uDQD/CbtSZ0jm05SBhWhX8MhJnEa VHCfqHVXhqufccy2v895m3bKmTONjnuFZSuRNt/q+VnaoCn24iN46/Qrdt0pPzuj+Lwv UrBQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDxLxhlymbcr+3f4racAVaYxaSeHsHOgMIXqVw5cobGLJLzrfal4 Zr/DqLKNXYeMe0TX4O3rWVxRgOgW5eYWirF7AmM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ7kihw3hDX2peOcPUQpy6+oTpWOgB8Xeo+akz49tMpE7aTd70KQqO1ozjf4uruZmQeUXfer3h3jqyiqbmh24wE=
X-Received: by 2002:adf:f38e:0:b0:309:3bc3:7d25 with SMTP id m14-20020adff38e000000b003093bc37d25mr2706914wro.62.1685026699565; Thu, 25 May 2023 07:58:19 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CO1PR11MB4881C130988C6FF3A11B500AD8419@CO1PR11MB4881.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CO3PR13MB5752AE273D328D809BA179A9F4419@CO3PR13MB5752.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <CO3PR13MB5752AE273D328D809BA179A9F4419@CO3PR13MB5752.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
Reply-To: sarikaya@ieee.org
From: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 May 2023 09:58:07 -0500
Message-ID: <CAC8QAcfkEs_Z3q-p_OrjMPVvEt=gFJZdMFPSM2Pbh9SjSmVAmQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Michael McBride <michael.mcbride@futurewei.com>
Cc: "pthubert@cisco.com" <pthubert@cisco.com>, "IPv6 WG (ipv6@ietf.org)" <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000dd5e7c05fc85d95b"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/HkQ2wP_AU4sxS6ar0PueyNEJpvM>
Subject: Re: [IPv6] next steps for draft-ietf-6man-ipv6-over-wireless
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 25 May 2023 14:58:22 -0000

Hi all,


On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 4:48 PM Michael McBride <
michael.mcbride@futurewei.com> wrote:

> Looks good Pascal. Agree its ready to progress.
>
>
>
> [MCAST PROBLEMS] can be now be replaced with RFC 9119.
>



> And you may want to consider moving the acronyms up from page 13 to page 3.
>

I had already suggested this long time back.

Having said that I am surprised Pascal all of a sudden is asking WGLC.

I said give me a break to myself 😀.

Behcet

>
>
> Question on your Bonjour reference. Bonjour uses mDNS. Is that what you
> are referring to with “Excessive use of broadcast by protocols such as
> ND-Classic and Bonjour led network administrators to install multicast rate
> limiting to protect the network.”? We didn’t get into Bonjour in 9119 but
> we did get into mDNS a bit, ie, when many devices are using it. Just want
> to make sure we are saying that same thing.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> mike
>
>
>
> *From:* ipv6 <ipv6-bounces@ietf.org> *On Behalf Of * Pascal Thubert
> (pthubert)
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 23, 2023 11:52 PM
> *To:* IPv6 WG (ipv6@ietf.org) <ipv6@ietf.org>
> *Subject:* [IPv6] next steps for draft-ietf-6man-ipv6-over-wireless
>
>
>
> Dear WG:
>
>
>
> We adopted that draft to publish it as informational; it is at the same
> time a state of the art, a problem statement, and an applicability
> statement.
>
>
>
> The issues are clear and present, see also
> draft-ietf-v6ops-nd-considerations. We face customer situations where
> clients are not properly served because ND snooping fails to locate them
> all with a painful regularity. This impacts all sorts of situations, from
> wireless to fabrics / EVPN.
>
>
>
> Note that This is indeed very related to the SLAAC operation and IPv4 is
> mostly immune. Meaning that the IPv6 experience is of more broadcasts and
> less reliability.
>
>
>
> In order to progress in solving the issues raised, it makes sense to
> publish soon and move on. The draft has been progressing as an individual
> submission for a long time and it is mostly complete, IMHO. So my intent is
> to ask for WGLC sooner than later. To get there, reviews would be highly
> appreciated.
>
>
>
> Many thanks in advance : )
>
>
>
> Pascal
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email