Re: [v6ops] Scope of Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses (Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gont-6man-ipv6-ula-scope-00.txt)

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Sat, 20 February 2021 16:09 UTC

Return-Path: <fgont@si6networks.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 A85EC3A1517; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 08:09:03 -0800 (PST)
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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 6--uEheTVO5m; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 08:09:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fgont.go6lab.si (fgont.go6lab.si [IPv6:2001:67c:27e4::14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 738443A1513; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 08:08:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2800:810:464:2b9:a5f3:43ef:575c:2a1c] (unknown [IPv6:2800:810:464:2b9:a5f3:43ef:575c:2a1c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by fgont.go6lab.si (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4FFB428032B; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 16:08:51 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Scope of Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses (Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gont-6man-ipv6-ula-scope-00.txt)
To: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, "Manfredi (US), Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>, "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>
References: <a5b9b8566ce446d3a5e5dcc9ca2fbac2@boeing.com> <CAN-Dau1xD21EpqrSXKHLzADPyjeWcwc=phHGSFP8cj6705O2BQ@mail.gmail.com> <5f0f480a-b331-7f0c-a738-5d80bd8569e6@si6networks.com> <02dd48fbe6cc44c482662fdc1978219f@boeing.com> <4908665c-94cf-810f-8bff-7407e3abe099@si6networks.com> <c09cfe42-f74b-ccaf-f03b-fb6942ed890f@gmail.com> <061050f0-6034-d11c-1898-24bc8461aed9@si6networks.com> <YDEX/Uu9X2hm+RX/@Space.Net>
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Message-ID: <a462cdaf-f942-7da8-8b4b-611de653e09e@si6networks.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2021 11:46:31 -0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <YDEX/Uu9X2hm+RX/@Space.Net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/HuHC-I50AwXoCf-OCdQYpxX4wVk>
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: Sat, 20 Feb 2021 16:09:04 -0000

On 20/2/21 11:09, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 09:58:29PM -0300, Fernando Gont wrote:
>> On 18/2/21 21:36, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>> So, my thought (and it belongs on this thread OR the 'IPv6 addressing: Gaps?' one) is something like:
>>>
>>> We should abolish, delete, expunge and deprecate the word "scope" from all IPv6 documents. It clearly doesn't have an agreed meaning, so it is worse than useless.
>>
>> FWIW, wfm. :-)
> 
> Seconded.

That said, just ran into this I-D, that also makes use of "scope": 
draft-king-irtf-challenges-in-routing



>> (Modulo: the multicast folks do use "scope" in a more "successful" way,
>> IIRC?)
> 
> Their definitions are at least somewhat more clear on what a "scope" is -
> send a packet to that address, and this is how far it will get.
> 
> In practice, how much IPv6 multicast is there which is not "node" and
> "link" scoped?  Or, to be even more picky, not "link" scoped?

I guess that depends a lot on the deployment environment. For the 
general case, the answer is "hardly any". But then I'm told that in e.g. 
some stock markets they are *required* to emply multicast to spread some 
information.

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492