Re: 6man w.g. last call for <draft-ietf-6man-grand>

Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com> Wed, 15 July 2020 20:48 UTC

Return-Path: <markzzzsmith@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 2C9423A0FD7 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 13:48:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM=0.001, HK_RANDOM_FROM=0.999, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 7zos9TPwDBfH for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 13:48:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ot1-x32e.google.com (mail-ot1-x32e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::32e]) (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 BB4903A0FD4 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 13:48:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ot1-x32e.google.com with SMTP id 95so2525688otw.10 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 13:48:01 -0700 (PDT)
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=5v5ZWrgv3prqRF+T/oIszE1VPn+bgRV+aunm3/be+NA=; b=bnxBnxHSEb+rSUVxeP61z/419nT8gKSVu29HortRJ6+rKCACjOisZCmCQYldGtaKDE m51zdTipPmOR1lLjIV0pRWGZaTqn1DyyMi2FHab6Tkitde3kPmT6x6VuGsLN1pVgdfxi XLemQR/EOc1wX1l8jZd9UhFv++il2JJmskWe/ZTG9bx568wNw8W1q4r6GldJIUut7M48 RgEOwEmB9NE06khehVjfaXIRx+0W1bK4XhAsJlAmukbOC/vM5gpFq2uoLoE449ddkcIx Q5AJLUnJzBzkzoqQaV0fkweRhLR+7cJK5rSooqAYGKp8hamM6ySa1vJ1T9VpvzoJ5hjK WdvQ==
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=5v5ZWrgv3prqRF+T/oIszE1VPn+bgRV+aunm3/be+NA=; b=Iiq7gYwZAYBxFhnWjZw0jbiM+KQlB/YwZZl26WAFAEjR73YHgfqr6d+YTC9VdrBZeg h/VVjGKyZq4Hx+L4zJJvKOhPLZuV0qa80ecuGw2G1n3MTTv48Tkk2qQBe545Ypy03nkF TShDVJg8ccQQrDLlucYAugBnvrA1c9PZmBOZzmaHkZWEa+7OaySPuIttXCTIsACnx7E+ e7vSf/cDmqkOBa+XPO5/xC6ol8fM9YBoMZjcApTZTnIFe75OxLybzxQUBJSMiC6wPqld cTqfrnbwC/4vD6ZYPo+tIT41zl46Mite9AMiunTI6eylm8syclJ7LXECDhHPEti/l9Zs raGg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531E+K+BM+eonOBPBAe12TOqSTnVyg/FxlHiA+s4KYRLbfQPcyvV HMUPYAmAImwL1xmix5rCMhSyE14+P5S0wrk/Lg8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxLjQ2kzmN5aF9HWvGbZ77MJxs77UlGX7Z+vo7oHlgPGQHpHdTWDUlycZR6KqkstcT0n7G8ba4oPq5LpO4i2ds=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:2661:: with SMTP id a88mr1479941otb.74.1594846081123; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 13:48:01 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20160428004904.25189.43047.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <882A1EDB-4A41-47E7-88D6-AC37D3341C6A@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <882A1EDB-4A41-47E7-88D6-AC37D3341C6A@gmail.com>
From: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2020 06:47:34 +1000
Message-ID: <CAO42Z2yWzcQBkDjOsaiM2Ppij0v=s1edMLyZeLbf1e89wVU3UA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: 6man w.g. last call for <draft-ietf-6man-grand>
To: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, Jen Linkova <furry@google.com>
Cc: IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/Re9PHrttVipRs0wSHt7miLAMS44>
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: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 20:48:03 -0000

Hi,

Unfortunately I don't support advancement right now, as I've had some
further fairly significant suggestions for it which I've been
struggling to finding time to provide. Apologies for the delay,
started a new job.

In summary, and I'll provide more details and text over the weekend:

- I've changed my mind on the idea of an optimisation of not
performing this for link-local addresses i.e. only performing it for
off-link addresses, for two reasons:

  -  IPv6 routers may need to send ICMPv6 messages to hosts, and can
use and will prefer link-local addresses for that if possible.

  - IPv6 routers can forward packets with link-local addresses as long
as it is back on to the same link, per RFC4007 (I'm not sure of the
use case, perhaps NBMA links? draft-smith-6man-link-locals-off-link
would allow it on multiaccess broadcast links).

  Both of these cases means that using GRAND to proactively load a
router's ND cache with entries for a hosts' link-local address(s)
would be beneficial, and it would be a simpler mechanism to do GRAND
for all types of new addresses regardless.


- Regarding the idea of using link-lay unicasts to send these
messages, another way to identify routers to send them to would be to
use the Router flag that is supplied in ND NAs. Needs a bit more
thought, however this may overcome the limitation of hosts not being
required to keep all routers in their default router list. Possibly
hosts will remember these ND NA cache entries, for the purposes of
NUD, even though they might not remember the corresponding RA router
entries on their Default Router list.

(Actually, thinking about it more right now, RA announced routers
don't have to be default routers i.e. Router Lifetime == 0, they can
supply more specific routes to hosts via the RFC4191 Route Information
Option, not sure if it is mandatory for hosts to remember all RIOs and
their announcing, RL==0 routers. (Senario: All routers' RAs RL=0, RAs
however have RIOs, hosts ignore RIOs so can't reach anything if RIOs
are optional to remember))


Apologies again for the delay.

Regards,
Mark.




On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 at 03:17, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> This message starts a new two week 6MAN Working Group Last Call on advancing:
>
>         Title:    Gratuitous Neighbor Discovery: Creating Neighbor Cache Entries on First-
>                   Hop Routers
>         Author:   Jen Linkova
>         Filename: draft-ietf-6man-grand-00
>         Pages:    11
>         Date:     March 9, 2020
>
>        https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-grand
>
> as a Proposed Standard.
>
> Substantive comments and statements of support for publishing this document should be directed to the mailing list.  Editorial suggestions can be sent to the author.  This last call will
> end on 29 July 2020.
>
> Thanks,
> Bob & Ole
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------