Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-07.txt> (IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture) to Internet Standard

Christopher Morrow <christopher.morrow@gmail.com> Wed, 22 February 2017 03:12 UTC

Return-Path: <christopher.morrow@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 02A6F129518; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 19:12:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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_LOW=-0.7, 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 R8WsTus0N72j; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 19:12:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk0-x235.google.com (mail-qk0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::235]) (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 93664129411; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 19:12:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk0-x235.google.com with SMTP id x71so74747790qkb.3; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 19:12:20 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=+LFQzzrxrOYXLGqHhvrxFBNQ2Z2FA4ixhw5A6Nw1sXM=; b=f8O9oT5opSjKtQD9SC7Ni+wFQdXtWx/+AjeeZ+wvdVhKMYXGZ6u2B9zOI5qOQeaBnp YkcUYAFAySTOnRu06DGHYwZ0ptZeXxyyL//IgpObAUG/ElAZUx2mNaMGnERz/4mwcD0l UWeEoGG0/5czKlWGyKEuX9Hp0MNymMVv3ZCG/Uhafpz+bnKcb7o+DGZVE10+nnlvfi63 HMYsuT48KTeYolZTJ669IBIZgn6VCiE4bM351A869FGRQkWjIkytCUH34FRJDbLZ5Y0F cvrZNO4wvs2zg7b7aaLanHxNR9x6Fo4J46gVEUQaSZaHJepaIvuaipoa6uDBIpQ0103Y Y92g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=+LFQzzrxrOYXLGqHhvrxFBNQ2Z2FA4ixhw5A6Nw1sXM=; b=PUd55iwNa1AA7r6HfGB7uDH0+kQem6Sx6iWq5mU2iDLl5rViTNl9kzfc3mRz7+tgwM +P976YF/2oT+dWPkBmSSswak1BtpPD2vpbjlWeIydslxRZp60hvJslXkT1pqgzzuj5NV dEHCVJ5DjC6Ny0TTZZOZFZN8dRjWmM+Vv8Hn62yhH9CNsoO42Iar4ePYceDGxjOQywcQ YceqL0szU/gToJAbnA2TQ2nfxgs69PoAl8n4JV1dqzLPNIo57ycDVOVGFHicTYDBPC/4 nPGiCYhv4xFnRlwbmTpVOgIE5GSBZEyHVNcQf6ya0fm3h3zM+PlCb07VhfY6zG+ohGuM F2zA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39nA9ztlBM/X++LGZ61deFHf8/KgJ8weZ0d7g6/tWNLrxjjfUfWKIzCtpBHMQ1oJKiRMQj1a6dUG1tjiQw==
X-Received: by 10.55.94.198 with SMTP id s189mr26573730qkb.236.1487733139675; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 19:12:19 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.140.91.71 with HTTP; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 19:12:18 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr28iQHt0iuLvR3ndrT3Hfct=4k9dxjJeu3MAjDjOogEvA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <05FD5283-9A15-4819-8362-5E6B2416D617@employees.org> <CAKD1Yr3B+dw83B0+26oUqdVJE==wHUBwoWzfWBJep8f+=uM8xQ@mail.gmail.com> <d9dc153a-61a8-5976-7697-ce1ecc9c8f3f@gmail.com> <4AF83EE6-6109-491F-BE66-114724BB197B@employees.org> <75196cfa-5476-0c7b-7612-ea2e446fc6f1@gmail.com> <B4A4FFFD-A90D-4C26-BDBD-75555840CA22@employees.org> <m2wpcqeuot.wl-randy@psg.com> <44F7BEDA-CF11-4E1E-BA6F-88794DEC1AF7@employees.org> <20170221001940.GB84656@Vurt.local> <068ce975-8b1e-a7c5-abba-2bfc1d904d70@gmail.com> <20170221101339.GC84656@Vurt.local> <CAKD1Yr33oQb=gMGaEM++hLgmMtxMdihiDrUihEsjs63vy8qRbA@mail.gmail.com> <54c81141-e4f5-4436-9479-9c02be6c09bb@Spark> <CAKD1Yr28iQHt0iuLvR3ndrT3Hfct=4k9dxjJeu3MAjDjOogEvA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Christopher Morrow <christopher.morrow@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2017 22:12:18 -0500
Message-ID: <CAL9jLaZgTp++PJ9KGHEWuPoVm6t3b8QfVDCEhz5h4fv-0fuUAA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-07.txt> (IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture) to Internet Standard
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114e2e204fa48a054915ddd3
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/S1btFcUjFfMtD0X9bfQs9rmqEZs>
Cc: 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, 6man-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis@ietf.org, IETF-Discussion Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 22 Feb 2017 03:12:22 -0000

On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 10:00 PM, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>;
wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Job Snijders <job@ntt.net>; wrote:
>
>> Those "thousands of interconnections" facilitate the communication
>> between millions of those hosts.
>>
>
> But the configuration cost and management overhead is not proportional to
> the hosts that are served by those interconnections, it is proportional to
> the number of interconnections. A 10x100G peering interconnection that
> serves X million hosts is one interface that has to be managed.
>
>
isn't the dicsussion here really:
  "If you want to use /64 go ahead, if you want to use /121 go for it, if
you want to use SLAAC you'll get a /64 and like it"

which fits both the interconnect problem space and the home-consumer
problem space. The change outlined ~6 messages back seemed to be a more
officious way to say what my quoted bit above says, and seemed just fine
for both use cases.