IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Generic anycast addresses...

Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> Thu, 30 May 2019 22:08 UTC

Return-Path: <eckert@i4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
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 DD086120113 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 May 2019 15:08:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.198
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.198 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 Lc7ASVf8MnR0 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 May 2019 15:08:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B936F120004 for <6man@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 May 2019 15:08:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [IPv6:2001:638:a000:4134::ffff:52]) by faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0DC954890C; Fri, 31 May 2019 00:08:38 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 10463) id B1EF4440041; Fri, 31 May 2019 00:08:38 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 31 May 2019 00:08:38 +0200
From: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>, Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: Generic anycast addresses...
Message-ID: <20190530220838.g2hshonsjxmfnd55@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
References: <7A9560FC-0393-45DF-8389-B868455AC6DD@fugue.com> <20190530005734.7d2alod2zoaemmhc@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <D6E27B45-437F-45BE-A305-47DD460BCE02@fugue.com> <26144.1559226966@localhost> <1DD451A7-D898-4105-974C-53776A3DA9F2@fugue.com> <20190530152902.l2nmyhadr4e4kt7x@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <0FF19D6D-1A45-41EF-BE34-CC35B5E51E1E@steffann.nl> <D91629F6-73AC-4A80-80EF-16644F73DA36@fugue.com> <701687d4-842c-6a16-3c97-349125324e3f@gmail.com> <D648647D-60E1-4DCE-B0BE-11002E0AE5A4@fugue.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <D648647D-60E1-4DCE-B0BE-11002E0AE5A4@fugue.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/J8XYcGACpoepwvkYVkjHgaYFVYw>
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, 30 May 2019 22:08:46 -0000

To me, a non-fuzzy boundary is one where you do something like ACL on
a set of links completely isolating some area of the network. Fuzzy
could vbe absence of default route causing ULA to stop. Not sure if
these are good examples of any actual definition, but both ae possible with
ULA.

I'd mostly be concerned about non-fuzzy boundaries wrt. security,
so not sure if i'd always want to avoid non-fuzzy boundaries.


On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 02:59:33PM -0700, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On May 30, 2019, at 2:19 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Ted, please do think about the main point: "the fuzzy nature of the site concept". (And, shameless plug, see https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-carpenter-limited-domains <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-carpenter-limited-domains>). Limited scope anycast needs a non-fuzzy scope boundary.
> 
> Do ULAs have a non-fuzzy scope boundary?   Serious question???I actually do not know how this is handled in the network.
> 

> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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