Re: Running code (Was: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6only-flag-03.txt)

Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com> Mon, 29 October 2018 01:49 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 26690127B92 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 18:49:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.498
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.498 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, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 Vm7NJBvhSaOr for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 18:49:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ot1-x333.google.com (mail-ot1-x333.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::333]) (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 8DAEB124C04 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 18:49:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ot1-x333.google.com with SMTP id d5so6094892oti.6 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 18:49:10 -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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=IXe650oHvMOU6+0lybuVBa1lU5FL5TgWJ1GlXMmhcZU=; b=DzF7j23u+5eZyr4skK77uvWtIdXEvcKWj9rTOdbX0qbt9i6orD24K9aXE6O21uDMXP bGggK7oyhBZa9tjcaTMFnBk1OI31pSvZY2+lZ4eWrjMuyDc1ZNlScNtNBPcfM+CKjQny S/dYGxV98VaiyPoAHeNvVdQZgz5mz27MNP96eBeDSFw9Ytu5DdIhMcgkNIDCJITx9ieB ZYtVVR93jq5RQqDDH62XR223yjTsJNfB/PZfBOvGbndCZNxko73+Me/q+5QzjzMeRvTw dsQ+DvGAhAczEXuzKBed++UWqCT5n+zupal5Ss52HJTzxurziP92KTBLjwBASEh9PoMR qjfw==
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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=IXe650oHvMOU6+0lybuVBa1lU5FL5TgWJ1GlXMmhcZU=; b=uEpDAGwhFlI/mO1Azn4RROSZ2RdWBkiZmFqzKiEn0IHZSxITWiZTgIM5wVuTNJW8u+ eJcwfx3cjmcQrOPEd4DUeZFMuF4V1PC52vrMdbScg9DQzdeq0bK8v0Dun/1dtggHA4mt wKxfSbNPU8HxcghjEhXNRZBm12xh7j0av+b2/0JM4LcirMD+DOkHCcCA6I+VO2MLFmJs HfDNf8QMtEy/UTTF1OkbcQ+GJWw3J0PxCvRGj2V88j/Kiy+aa04DlZhS/2ncSTQCxbrt 3KlaeX6WpChnR7uhI5NkuhJ2X6g7NXc9xx4oLzKvzwJU3asKavAohx+vgWLu/DG2oT1a /bPQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gIdU3nLo1EFNspRK1hWVudaCM+5gw3cXMqJJEDbxqOTLzO4GPBP xJ5959cHTq4K0H7f+AN6OqbNx2vmC4TN6X4BMng=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5fsGLezwm/BXjxFzURbBkvr4SciUGy/vdyQv8Qfa5SarpHmz3o/GeEN0FcIHsIEIS+aJ0ZqdpWu5jDaf/5c9mI=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:37b6:: with SMTP id x51mr8184225otb.256.1540777749662; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 18:49:09 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAFU7BASO_ByzbanhLKnWV280O_fASd-8W+ujpj3sN6d2-whw2w@mail.gmail.com> <66759b73-0a22-e1a9-49db-21154e8e1267@gmail.com> <37ba23b3-df19-9c2a-bdbe-ba7a99d72d05@si6networks.com> <0d6008a4-337b-2ccb-2d9f-837f786eca65@gmail.com> <bfa4397a-aa7a-1184-4147-4cbfbfd13603@si6networks.com> <E8DE18B5-94FC-411C-A310-E49A382E0079@thehobsons.co.uk> <e0fa8fad1b4249c9af79788323b0a922@boeing.com> <3A03A073-72E2-43A8-90A4-5C29DF445361@thehobsons.co.uk> <27fdbd71125842d888c5136684bf6e7b@boeing.com> <9A4368D6-E4B1-474C-9838-B584AF6D70C8@thehobsons.co.uk> <a3a2d823c38f44d48b301e2ca657e352@boeing.com> <6EE067A5-3536-4EDD-80D9-D98783DE57CE@thehobsons.co.uk> <0be69133e9a34199b5796410684ab226@boeing.com> <308494108c0b466f91a9314f7d9367bc@boeing.com> <8E339E1C-6AC9-4012-AA63-1A39D64EEDAB@thehobsons.co.uk> <f805c8e5b3dc40a8b8f245f44b7c1c7a@boeing.com> <e421e5ef-137f-bac1-765f-13e6c9107671@gmail.com> <c305e6f01a5349728489cbd53e818ae0@boeing.com>
In-Reply-To: <c305e6f01a5349728489cbd53e818ae0@boeing.com>
From: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 12:48:43 +1100
Message-ID: <CAO42Z2wpKpw4dqHU2UCck91qyr9jWnj-h7mQRRkArVH=asbDVw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Running code (Was: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6only-flag-03.txt)
To: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com>
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/TrxtpzuCcBfdIZ2LR5g_4EInJeY>
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: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 01:49:12 -0000

On Mon, 29 Oct 2018 at 12:38, Manfredi (US), Albert E
<albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com> wrote:
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
>
> > It adds the *intention* of the network manager that there should be no
> IPv4 traffic on the link. Of course, a host can decide to ignore that
> intention, and protocol police in the form of layer 2 filters may enforce
> the intention.
>
> But Brian, the network manager (usually, often) has no business making such decisions, other than for the services net admin provides. *Especially* if the protocol police filters at layer 2, the network user should be legally and ethically able to bring his own IPv4 peripherals, and switch and/or IPv4 router, and have them work. With no negative impact to anyone else.
>
> We already know that the flag is set individually, at each router. You may have three routers that have the flag set, and one that does not. So this says quite clearly, do not bother trying to route IPv4 packets through the routers with flag set. It does not say that the net manager doesn’t want IPv4 traffic in the link. Push comes to shove, the flag means only, this router won’t transfer IPv4 packets.
>

You're misunderstanding the mechanism. This flag is not a router
capability flag.




> If there's any intention for this flag to be misconstrued by some equipment vendors, creating a clever puzzle to be solved by perfectly legitimate users, every time they need to add equipment, then I'd say, let's avoid that. No?
>
> > Personally, if I was in a position to write the heuristic that a host
> uses, I would use this flag as a heavily weighted input that would
> either prevent any IPv4 activity whatever, or increase the backoff
> timers to a very large value, since it's a clear signal that, for example,
> mDNS over IPv4 is simply not available.
>
> Maybe so. Or maybe, after spending time writing the new logic, the equipment designer writing the heuristics will determine they can mostly ignore the flag? That's always been my question, in this thread.
>
> Bert
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------