IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses for the network

Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com> Fri, 24 January 2020 23:05 UTC

Return-Path: <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
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 B5BD612089B for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 15:05:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 dYwevwYHY2jW for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 15:05:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-il1-x12a.google.com (mail-il1-x12a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12a]) (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 4450A1200C4 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 15:05:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-il1-x12a.google.com with SMTP id s18so2553287iln.0 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 15:05:32 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=iINuurE6p0h7Szy9tge1ajs9FXZDBQZzfHNhbpR6npE=; b=MRxir2tYlOOW5/kReBIi6Yo2eksR4xoKEp1nhxPR7UECezupWoTtdTBuXYyXyaskMH xAD0yW5MvOwR1KoIlmAuz9NVo06frp3LL+wEp4wJ+ZAFKWAB/a8gP7hYgLruNg/lw6Y8 C3QRsXmdDq+0g5sE50aEIGAustclPvZILTFyWwag8c6SQ+mYO4qrJPjYuAjzwoS92Aa9 LLOzxg+hDXLIONdAW5N2h60aEA+Iz08BAcV4iWUNdNP6FkL3OeV7gPHRWBH+lTSfSBrB 4NEjh+9Lf8lJYahE1+1wxqOXre+W37+xnB3cuyhBMnjkbTEpe86pE5v0LtAlpecjyxdE oz2A==
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; bh=iINuurE6p0h7Szy9tge1ajs9FXZDBQZzfHNhbpR6npE=; b=F7OrW5GfUEm+z/ABdo6bPxQZCYmYYQkDmzQUMVzgiJOWKzW8FJY6ll2l8QGq87HVsm 1ns1lp4GBxibiSg52ToRE9fLX/xQEb8+IDjBmeY5o1qwytzj4yODssOuKaDpUyRokYol IEwAjxAda0p9zmo5udeXmSIUfA4+lYGX5ylSjj/euaYWHhMnt84MfkZnqzIGR1+kiQ2r /q0YZjszAh9pEn4ug5c6F7ed2u56OThjoTqON8dEgXszwu3aVHEP6E5B9wLjAMWabtsJ gObtBemg/sgau36J4RaBMehdUpYcJ4Oj7gvxT9a6A0WChpu4lVL4Vy0CUqyJpWYu55Wi RDow==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXlHL7t2HR5xyeKjrA9NY/btVzVRX5TskNz2zp7FGlAaGmj7nFs rMZc3gILYzvoyf6chlhuFL4ixEAo81vcGwDeL+XYpaYL
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyxHVLMJFiyFAWDpaHAWLJehYpcxerBIk/Gg95/6ErxRx+9HAQL3XD22YlOfKIKLZDc77jBmojeYTouK9BfAtI=
X-Received: by 2002:a92:1948:: with SMTP id e8mr5014525ilm.158.1579907131114; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 15:05:31 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <03C832CE-7282-4320-BF1B-4CB7167FE6BE@employees.org> <e936078e-01f9-0254-a8d0-4095455154ac@si6networks.com> <D85412DF-4B03-4790-9E39-968D50ECF86B@employees.org> <m1iuwJV-0000MAC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <B341FF1B-C559-4D54-B117-A58EB6A3C955@employees.org> <dfe3a236-4e61-d2be-929c-869a81994879@si6networks.com> <m1iuxwI-0000M3C@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <CABNhwV1XcATmrosW_kRTJgrXyTSNqPe=uR4VDt=_eXtt5=H3CQ@mail.gmail.com> <431eefce-594f-b7bd-4d49-a7a7ddbcd684@si6networks.com> <CABNhwV1wA+ntT1SHzzF19VotpXED=MOD2HTbQq2hL_nhaOR3qw@mail.gmail.com> <7c65c99f-1418-eb07-b984-8ad7ff6b7a62@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7c65c99f-1418-eb07-b984-8ad7ff6b7a62@gmail.com>
From: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2020 18:05:03 -0500
Message-ID: <CABNhwV0jyS+bgKzHeQe9x-3FZvsr_-BiKVm=-G_LGizC7nR=dw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses for the network
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Cc: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, ipv6@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000540a61059ceacbac"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/O6hLu8JQ7IxoYacHwy4p_4Irngs>
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, 24 Jan 2020 23:05:35 -0000

On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 5:11 PM Brian E Carpenter <
brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:

> >  I agree RFC 7217 stable address is most preferred however Microsoft and
> Apple don’t support yet.


  Gyan>On my IPv6 roadmap list with Microsoft.  So far no ETA.

>
> I have no idea for Apple, but afaik MS switched to pseudorandom stable
> IIDs per interface a long time ago, before Windows 7 possibly. I haven't
> seen a modified EUI-64 address on my laptop for a very long time. This is
> not the same thing as RFC7217 from a privacy point of view, but for network
> operations and neighbour cache size it seems like the same thing.


   Gyan> I think it’s EUI-64 and not modified.

I found this link from Microsoft but it does not state if modified is
supported or not.

>
>
> Anyway, I hope we're all agreed that this topic, however interesting is
> not worth more than a small comment in RFC4941bis. Isn't it actually a
> v6ops topic ("Operational impact of numerous addresses per host")?


  Gyan> Agreed

>
>
> Regards
>    Brian
>
> --

Gyan  Mishra

Network Engineering & Technology

Verizon

Silver Spring, MD 20904

Phone: 301 502-1347

Email: gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email