Re: IPv4 traffic on "ietf-v6ONLY"

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Wed, 15 November 2017 23:54 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@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 28743127011 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 15:54:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 HxJgsOHBXLGb for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 15:54:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg0-x232.google.com (mail-pg0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::232]) (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 6CD541270AB for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 15:54:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg0-x232.google.com with SMTP id s75so19202845pgs.0 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 15:54:55 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:organization:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=NtVmwepmnGB7f6CwKT1WlvlFg6HMISoe9UnuqCwRP+w=; b=bf0A9Pl7yGpc++QnS35AdMg+kqSwUTmIH+9BO+C4pNKBrbHc4+DK+nWL7ojCAKfZ22 +WIM7k+iRIR8nhf8yOyPSfG2WaYiIQCyl3EQKPAjuoaaTXoH3D8ys4EtUMIkcy9SC7zx VKNu3BCg0r/LgM1Z83ODub47xts7G88pFE9qN1gy43zz3HiUg3FI1/W5Re3MkYpflE+7 Y2YERUnSWbLRRkRwHK2BG+rLLq/iFB3leeCnCMdxtAyxcO9yV9bViGWSqJYmV8Q+4Khw ep9Ri63Uk1EuVMNLoSjwjzvaoCXUmJgWAtbLRtWrUbQEb12Tn4faPSdQ7kGteJS3NOdr d5sg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=NtVmwepmnGB7f6CwKT1WlvlFg6HMISoe9UnuqCwRP+w=; b=p1e8F1TsTTg79Vx2nGlYiU/EvGpr3xev2SPJ742UHR9pacxahp6JLZSSQC57HwoQVa OUiB9qWPCMelriIrviqkwMEQORiNZyKewryg7t6e+u1cK+rEvsnMIk04+rt0wzCBb+BY fLmWnUVhTVUnMc0jO1yAQKT/o2p7rAetarvsgVsrWJ2Dx4SA9NZZxaf2gbGEFIhDzrIl aNZRE2ljEi3GCIB07MWMkedLeV0dLK+sYuahCFEelE5TZJ31pSMq1F6rm8b5AGAWN0CI yGdHLobZ/9cYVq1X0lGcM5xMzDTiCcSJGtGZOh5zMVA5Aq1QbY+O6DKGhsMD+N4nkVSj LO1g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX4MQPi3kA62gJukwggtKh3DYaYp04LzKSvTyeRp/z25/RwVDehr eYomws/UWb51ZscMJvICuNr42A==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMakfgb/z48NbcTAPW6RDLw22MxnU16bmo3BsuclMyVc7Z5YRSCalwccrc1mBoOGCCKWkjzjow==
X-Received: by 10.159.229.10 with SMTP id s10mr15246144plq.386.1510790094756; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 15:54:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.16.132.82] ([101.100.166.3]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p189sm35656448pfp.127.2017.11.15.15.54.53 for <ipv6@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 15 Nov 2017 15:54:53 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: IPv4 traffic on "ietf-v6ONLY"
To: ipv6@ietf.org
References: <f9805855-68cf-a3e8-a13f-c6ac31b09058@gmail.com> <bbd4e1d2-047f-6758-76f8-fd591c51dad7@gmail.com> <D631CE54.8C0F5%lee@asgard.org> <m1eEvEP-0000G3C@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <D75288D5-B571-46EB-A35E-0DBD79F930E5@google.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <72f42d56-2466-dfaa-59e9-ebb2264e8ca4@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 12:54:56 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <D75288D5-B571-46EB-A35E-0DBD79F930E5@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/U9iHeg39ecRpWCcpaNqQ-ZGGReM>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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 Nov 2017 23:54:57 -0000

On 16/11/2017 08:15, james woodyatt wrote:
> On Nov 15, 2017, at 02:47, Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-4@u-1.phicoh.com> wrote:
>>
>> The safest option to do that is a DHCPv4 option that says 'no IPv4 service here, go away'.
> 
> 
> Better: extend ARP with a signal that says, “ARP is not welcome here."
 
However, the IPv4 traffic seen on ietf-dns64 is negligible and harmless.
That is a practical indication that this problem probably isn't worth
solving. 

I submit for example that sending a new "not welcome" response to
ARP requests would do more harm than good, since the legacy hosts
would probably react badly.

   Brian