IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: A common problem with SLAAC in "renumbering" scenarios

Richard Patterson <richard@helix.net.nz> Fri, 15 February 2019 12:58 UTC

Return-Path: <richard@helix.net.nz>
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 5BDBA130E74 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 04:58:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=helix-net-nz.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 fas7oOujC4Nt for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 04:58:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yb1-xb29.google.com (mail-yb1-xb29.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b29]) (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 C09B0130E73 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 04:58:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yb1-xb29.google.com with SMTP id j85so393527ybg.11 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 04:58:54 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=helix-net-nz.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=vehfVV1JWCpdJCJphQG2fAW0dZdX3vl9lgOPgwzHzzA=; b=Rx5yEPyEp/0n/qSEYXndKAqSX0zlmyOLrU26hHAXdzKd9uKZRvyHE/I6194vaN6Y/C vxrdufnMgI/doMyjY+QN/vl1FCNA2yXG2nIxNlpnf63mV8jm82XFCbuevNw1soNdtdTk 6jf7B2gvVAWFrAf76CfiAaxOnQv7/3qYsFjq+f62qR488aROqCC0WRyKuigWjjoFiKmd 6LjAA9xoXeqmn1w4gd/geKjmCTB+a+unlnkwH8MhntqNi3rYoS+EqIwKZhcgZHZbf4yT kXnJbWkQFSXBZiVIiPkoDq/wPrTgh/YSOfad5FhsjY2QEXY90x62jBtSaHmCnCisBeBB p9VQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=vehfVV1JWCpdJCJphQG2fAW0dZdX3vl9lgOPgwzHzzA=; b=ITRLgNueFda11Z2mbpsfu7FY5svipQdzJCZdoypLQT5pongqTsKCaczQRQbyXVBk+/ 4/iVvOwR5V/VE+9/Y1tIMUfUMrV+RKp/sLUomBXwfIJH/yHwNxfPFzjyDCsPpIRTE7me VVX2yWSZDxRuAtWT6y5AbGp1rPK+jeD0hMkehnRTjgqyULn6fIF/n9CktCsubDFDkIuF rJi2Sjvd6r4bg5tzh5MMkYuYALWWioRrLBuJ16URt+9kcXNQfCvqR3s9Oioom2yQxlYQ ySNJbbGWYj9DXdQVohYt7RauYrCxPmim435Y281KtCO251KLoOkSYa3X9hkuhpQjpwdt 68YA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuZ9fMvUbX2EwVXUlYrw6Ea5bRNpDQNNjgQ19k9p0Q7sOQrpJT2n s5G17oGEylUXhYgHLyS5gv4Dlq9DCKc=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IaeYsRwrF+uZsZ1BHFgbokVKdSSZ0QyVi/6LGpK54LaGy0LV+Yne9OMLokwbQrhehyo0gzBXw==
X-Received: by 2002:a25:da12:: with SMTP id n18mr7896861ybf.236.1550235533684; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 04:58:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yb1-f169.google.com (mail-yb1-f169.google.com. [209.85.219.169]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l189sm2164718ywl.65.2019.02.15.04.58.52 for <ipv6@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 15 Feb 2019 04:58:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yb1-f169.google.com with SMTP id j85so393506ybg.11 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 04:58:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:4e05:: with SMTP id c5mr7400198ybb.389.1550235532699; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 04:58:52 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <60fabe4b-fd76-4b35-08d3-09adce43dd71@si6networks.com> <d38857c2-6e92-91d6-bb5d-d3eeeb61276a@gmail.com> <CAO42Z2yb47OyXk__Sz-kO00pfcBJgLAhff5DF=mpAddR0iCnAA@mail.gmail.com> <2612280f-195a-ae7a-b3b1-9022d9282fa7@foobar.org> <56F813F4-C512-40A9-8A68-1090C76A80F6@consulintel.es> <CAHL_VyCN8kU7qnLOphfGR25-xGBe_p6WeGTkKVXwU5uy5aJ8Dg@mail.gmail.com> <65DB4854-97D2-4C31-A691-2CD93812EF93@consulintel.es> <CAHL_VyCMpCcGkEQu+RV1GRf2QLB-HD0+AOOBV0YhfQ5sbydVzQ@mail.gmail.com> <8CE7A0CD-97D9-46A0-814D-CAF8788F9964@consulintel.es> <e3e0bf2273e04f15b792665d0f66dfe5@boeing.com> <4c5fab33-2bff-e5b5-fc1d-8f60a01a146d@go6.si> <b4525832-9151-20bf-7136-31d87ba6c88d@huitema.net> <444A9043-0EDF-4F21-9DCE-BF019B81D078@huitema.net> <9BA9D825-2B75-47FA-999E-2712E151AD01@huitema.net> <1b1a78b8-ccba-2085-0fb0-0c957e782146@moth.iki.fi> <7bab7a8a-1136-9b53-56b1-6401e62947d5@go6.si> <CAHL_VyDKh+R4UC5qicbEk-qVkYi8wxkXabPRn_mw9fi_1QHZ9g@mail.gmail.com> <98eb2f0c-7f13-e024-147e-dc2b2876a248@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <98eb2f0c-7f13-e024-147e-dc2b2876a248@gmail.com>
From: Richard Patterson <richard@helix.net.nz>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 12:58:41 +0000
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAHL_VyCiHUTfaqQV9E82GtSQwpr9A2ByeF+dvzazp2j1NT_2sQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAHL_VyCiHUTfaqQV9E82GtSQwpr9A2ByeF+dvzazp2j1NT_2sQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: A common problem with SLAAC in "renumbering" scenarios
To: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Cc: 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/KBkICXk-MkWPs-7PKS7_thVLrXI>
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: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 12:58:56 -0000

On Fri, 15 Feb 2019 at 12:29, Alexandre Petrescu
<alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> wrote:
> Le 15/02/2019 à 13:20, Richard Patterson a écrit :
> > And that mechanism already exists in the form of a DHCPv6 RELEASE, but
> > not if the assignment authority has been removed from the DHCPv6
> > Server, and placed within RADIUS instead.
>
> I speculate RELEASE does not work with prefixes (like it does work with
> IA_NA addresses, but not with IA_PD prefixes).

I'm not sure why you'd speculate that, but it does IME.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email