Re: p2p interfaces (Re: [v6ops] How do you solve 3GPP issue if neither operator nor handset supports PD?)

Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net> Tue, 24 November 2020 14:21 UTC

Return-Path: <jared@puck.nether.net>
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 3B1283A0E60 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 06:21:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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 ifBHYup5cFLL for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 06:21:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from puck.nether.net (puck.nether.net [IPv6:2001:418:3f4::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A62F13A0E5B for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 06:21:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by puck.nether.net (Postfix, from userid 162) id 2FA2C540141; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 09:21:20 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 09:21:20 -0500
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
Cc: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>, "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: p2p interfaces (Re: [v6ops] How do you solve 3GPP issue if neither operator nor handset supports PD?)
Message-ID: <20201124142120.GG3146465@puck.nether.net>
References: <CAKD1Yr1xV179LZ7Kxtk5mGruJcJ+BpGb2heBBy4ORtRU7bfvqw@mail.gmail.com> <CAMGpriWqnmL0qo0Hm=b+GbzcdCuXz6PM5aq8owE7-=ty5pDFsw@mail.gmail.com> <1DB65027-BEF2-4C0A-ACF4-C979DA7444C2@employees.org> <m1khXWs-00007wC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <47150D97-27D7-4AFD-8418-692D68D09828@employees.org> <m1khXol-0000MEC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <BD254B32-FAAE-4433-9CF5-2AF19275CA96@employees.org> <C9C0C278-0055-402B-A2BC-E7EE20C66483@cisco.com> <20201124141320.GE3146465@puck.nether.net> <alpine.DEB.2.20.2011241518310.26384@uplift.swm.pp.se>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.2011241518310.26384@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/KuAmUcgOoej813Edvb9jG4U7D64>
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: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 14:21:22 -0000

On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 03:19:26PM +0100, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Nov 2020, Jared Mauch wrote:
> 
> > 	If a link is point-to-point are there operations that should be
> > turned off, and should we define that list?  (perhaps DAD is one of them)
> 
> I've seen DAD failures disabling interface on IOS XR when POS link was
> looped...

	Yes, this is why i'm wondering if an interface is explicitly set
to be point-to-point, should we write up the guidance of what should can
or should be disabled?

	- Jared

-- 
Jared Mauch  | pgp key available via finger from jared@puck.nether.net
clue++;      | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/  My statements are only mine.