IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Could IPv6 address be more than locator?//draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix-03

Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> Sun, 02 June 2013 16:52 UTC

Return-Path: <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
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 9083921F90CD; Sun, 2 Jun 2013 09:52:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KFBHfC93BxLo; Sun, 2 Jun 2013 09:52:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3032921F909A; Sun, 2 Jun 2013 09:52:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r52Gpu5f019037; Sun, 2 Jun 2013 17:51:56 +0100
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk r52Gpu5f019037
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=201304; t=1370191916; bh=hBKqaYlPWroiM1MSwYDkkHMeW1k=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=13FR9hPT8qZbVmDwBXh+FVDjKWVNUMZEMH3n7V7q4r96kJsrK2cqn6ZD1W7ryjgzp bFtyDB/5BGcvDDl+XXn/oJVVw66Vq6ZfNdoaBNIeFpSBMqlKq6WYZF88CSqWQYm3aP CPpsXZGFbOCR4yUrh81DQckwmG+FQyBk+51QCuxU=
Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25d]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) envelope-from <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> with ESMTP (valid=N/A) id p51Hpu043065588322 ret-id none; Sun, 02 Jun 2013 17:51:56 +0100
Received: from [192.168.1.110] (host213-123-213-183.in-addr.btopenworld.com [213.123.213.183]) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r52GoZkD000565 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 2 Jun 2013 17:50:36 +0100
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_9D859031-26FE-4F5B-B5A1-C69AFC356B77"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\))
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Could IPv6 address be more than locator?//draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix-03
From: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307751C16A4@mbx-01.win.nominum.com>
Date: Sun, 02 Jun 2013 17:50:38 +0100
Message-ID: <EMEW3|96896e18fc012d5ab00d58d4d9082469p51Hpu03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|DB734243-57F4-4107-9FB6-7236A1DFDCE9@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
References: <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B923AC98DAE@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <03680813-07D9-459B-A229-FA974C9A4B9E@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <8E492087-390E-4F8E-8078-1D0E63849243@delong.com> <EMEW3|f3c1b4957f182cbee8e02a76a09ead4dp4Y7Ye03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|03680813-07D9-459B-A229-FA974C9A4B9E@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <CAKD1Yr0E5OUsphjhEaaMTjVarSGNdPEx6e1RyKDs5A=bkHGvBg@mail.gmail.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B923AC992D2@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <CAKD1Yr1c+-S02oWF1GjTdu-Vatee-EgXLKr=2=xdtYOtUubsYQ@mail.gmail.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B923AC99354@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <B001C1A1-DCF6-43AD-A792-56A58661E924@delong.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307751BD21E@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <65746D62-1F0E-4FAD-AC6A-270BD5757C8A@delong.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307751BFE2D@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <F8A3E2C6-57B1-4276-93F8-86E962368182@delong.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307751C0209@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <AE05ED64-72CF-4440-AFFE-C35B0353F1DA@delon! ! ! ! g.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307751C05FE@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <9B3FBB40-1C85-4918-8003-3DF3FEE68B09@delong.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307751C1363@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <DF584C50-315E-4A23-9920-69A424E70AC7@delong.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307751C1603@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <A2C4E86C-F9DC-4A9A-9BB3-C5B6A6720D0D@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <EMEW3|01e2edb6f45d0a3a90659fc6f8153a47p51HYp03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|A2C4E86C-F9DC-4A9A-9BB3-C5B6A6720D0D@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307751C16A4@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <DB734243-57F4-4107-9FB6-7236A1DFDCE9@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503)
X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
X-smtpf-Report: sid=p51Hpu043065588300; tid=p51Hpu043065588322; client=relay,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=5:0; fails=0
X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: r52Gpu5f019037
X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Cc: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>, "<v6ops@ietf.org>" <v6ops@ietf.org>, "draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix@tools.ietf.org" <draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix@tools.ietf.org>, "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Sun, 02 Jun 2013 16:52:10 -0000

On 2 Jun 2013, at 17:31, Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> wrote:

> On Jun 2, 2013, at 12:29 PM, Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
>> Well, this is why the homenet arch says that prefix delegation should be efficient.  Using DHCP-PD forces a structure to the delegations, and thus potential inefficiency. The OSPF-based solution doesn't have that limitation, but then has to handle potential clashes. 
> 
> No it _doesn't_.   There is no reason for DHCP-PD to be inefficient.   Why do you think it has to be inefficient?

Fair point - it would be good if Fred tickled draft-baker-homenet-prefix-assignment-01 which talks about that.

Tim

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email