IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] RFC7084

Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> Tue, 10 December 2013 16:55 UTC

Return-Path: <sander@steffann.nl>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 063331AE1D6; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 08:55:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.194
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.194 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_NL=0.55, HOST_EQ_NL=1.545, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 s59oiiwM-Gyq; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 08:55:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.sintact.nl (mail.sintact.nl [83.247.10.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C34111AE171; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 08:55:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9592E3A; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 17:55:47 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.sintact.nl
Received: from mail.sintact.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.sintact.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Hqo4ee8hsauN; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 17:55:45 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [100.91.63.199] (unknown [92.69.247.199]) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0A18534; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 17:55:45 +0100 (CET)
References: <96747494E3D74D41B20907035DB1E48DC7BB@MOPESMBX03.eu.thmulti.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611303B0269@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <96747494E3D74D41B20907035DB1E48DCD72@MOPESMBX03.eu.thmulti.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1312100803370.24602@uplift.swm.pp.se> <F92E1B55-C74B-400C-B83E-6B50D175D121@steffann.nl> <7B4820C5-B562-4BE7-8C6A-CBCDABC39728@nominum.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
In-Reply-To: <7B4820C5-B562-4BE7-8C6A-CBCDABC39728@nominum.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <07D76B96-3104-4781-A8BF-8FC072E50A3F@steffann.nl>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (11B554a)
From: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] RFC7084
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 17:55:45 +0100
To: Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, "<ipv6@ietf.org>" <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 10 Dec 2013 16:55:55 -0000

Hi Ted,

>> On Dec 10, 2013, at 6:08 AM, Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> wrote:
>> As far as I know the M flag is linked only to IA_NA. As far as I can see IA_PD is not linked to the M flag at all.
> 
> There is no agreement on what the M and O bits do.   Some people think M means stateful address management; some think M means IA_NA and O means IA_PD.   RFC 4861 is actually fairly clear, at least to my reading of it, that "M" means IA_NA and IA_PD, and that "O" means stateless DHCPv6, but I've heard people argue vehemently that "M" means _only_ IA_NA, and that "O" means IA_PD, because prefixes aren't addresses.
> 
> So if you believe my reading of RFC 4861, you would set 'M' and expect the HG to get both IA_NA and IA_PD; RFC 7084 makes it clear that _either_ the 'M' or 'O' bit being set triggers the HG to do prefix delegation.
> 
> So if you want to do prefix delegation and not stateful address assignment, set the 'O' bit and _not_ the 'M' bit, even though that contradicts what RFC 4861 says.

What a mess...
Sander

v2.39.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status