IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Fwd: Confirmation to advance: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6only-flag-05

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Thu, 09 May 2019 14:00 UTC

Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
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 A59D41200FE for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 May 2019 07:00:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.301
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.301 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=swm.pp.se
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 IiSbWQkac5g6 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 May 2019 07:00:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (swm.pp.se [212.247.200.143]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4422912004C for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 May 2019 07:00:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 3A6B1B9; Thu, 9 May 2019 16:00:16 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1557410416; bh=vsCWMyvBDU5Rzoz8vw33GHk5rwEt6u9/dPFPXdblSSU=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=PQ+IXWxhK3SnmTogEGbALOCJF7l0hxHK9DNt/KT4pDB2zyJaEv1jM+FsMyPiM940s BW+MRF9yeJzSjizD8Z8dJAvk3WV/OkqaJtl7hfqxOPpz6ImPCs5E/ID4eUmX7bX+5M 7pWuAWNrDJOWJX+KIdlbI1DJ02AcBzsa5I55WexI=
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 380BCB8; Thu, 9 May 2019 16:00:16 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 09 May 2019 16:00:16 +0200
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
cc: ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Fwd: Confirmation to advance: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6only-flag-05
In-Reply-To: <2c5cb04f-d695-b48d-a748-209ddf3b22b4@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1905091559200.1824@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <F8BFFCAD-E58E-4736-8A1C-56579B6F6032@employees.org> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1905070846120.1824@uplift.swm.pp.se> <5bf11ff3fb3b4ba88c33c23521d931e8@boeing.com> <CAN-Dau3BtudB5HM=1u72BExu_64teEDeO7i+aQXhk28Qc2u2vA@mail.gmail.com> <CAN-Dau0Rv3YKg+rmwMK2yDOD0iDi-=bG0uGq0yNMTkLH7nAGBw@mail.gmail.com> <2c5cb04f-d695-b48d-a748-209ddf3b22b4@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/N_aKMgZCvyVcFjRZigzwGeKceVU>
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, 09 May 2019 14:00:21 -0000

On Thu, 9 May 2019, Alexandre Petrescu wrote:

> Layer-2 filtering on ethertype is a great idea.  I would concur.
>
> But on cellular links there's no ethertype.  It's what they call a PDP type.

This draft is irrelevant in that context because for the PDP type there is 
explicit signaling of the PDP type, so the UE knows whether to use it for 
IPv4, IPv6 or IPv4+IPv6.

So there is no RA flag needed.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email