IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: I-D Action: draft-mishra-6man-variable-slaac-01.txt

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Wed, 04 November 2020 22:37 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 AF11C3A10AD; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:37:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.344
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.344 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, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.247, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, 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 P0EmZ0NRQ5-j; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:37:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf1-x42e.google.com (mail-pf1-x42e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42e]) (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 A2BC73A10B9; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:37:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf1-x42e.google.com with SMTP id 13so18538374pfy.4; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 14:37:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=PsvnZRRVkzY/bmlvMR58OPENacfusoSo5gjiM+hjdoM=; b=NlCq4TympXSmEQEecc1ShWZiaZlrYDw5UiNyIWxwa6q/EaDqLcdYqE0rkEMEZ781OB fxXNoSNREOATa5EDRHJeOkAYe/7cXwtpIeUTeiemTeOpnmtSmJoJBIYOzRs69A5huEHt eH/njULF3wao39HZ9SvHsEPfIaLMSJoJKlfPPjw+JsjxusOw8seYRNbUkdWIS25lnmqY l3swjJf2DVc7wDjgMDxNfThzsuP5bqBIKBSAXmL2xxJU0mQ2RXssh7pq5jpSEWok3S3K /0v/oc8xjDoQraRQZJ4uyRmZUJIxmatQcDs3x/7qKMmCcBAs/NiUql0pl/yqd3NkKJgr +NVg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=PsvnZRRVkzY/bmlvMR58OPENacfusoSo5gjiM+hjdoM=; b=fDuhkD0gggG5XTk1VMsppz10yTpN04nRkhVr1jtm+gsWoU89QjxLWFxPIGYhyVjGcS pUcYPvbzwlIJf5KWeObMrHwhX0GD8ZPRHjhwxql976TklfTuqXGV9FONxjUk+ITWpq1T BTBD79T5wtbCxT8kyOR8OL/v7dVHXb6DtACJ1U3bSHa0WKGmEpDajLqc6UhaCEID5QEy 8/8ralVe5JDWZlQOSiyEuweNt5SLzq1QfKk2I0srodXTzwLm0CU99v7XjIYRi7QcU2Vz WnqFunpp/i9a4TUqK1cbrNca/LbYQi2R7zWnqdY1Y2xK1A43MnXV6zhlnYGybGnueYfh p59A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533LcWQ3t/QFldmwTQbh1/aGYS+t5a196lgc+LGi5TK69NyWxsUe sJJWlTKBOMVu3bHfhl06000jTE4Ok2z/SQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwe2MPqM01gaQCjOYIexmY/rAIL0oUrB9lBmodHIvvCs/kmI626KLDWZH0VPjUzCMuiCI0tPg==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:bb18:: with SMTP id u24mr95998pjr.85.1604529458716; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 14:37:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([151.210.130.0]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x4sm3331457pfm.98.2020.11.04.14.37.35 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 04 Nov 2020 14:37:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-mishra-6man-variable-slaac-01.txt
To: Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com>, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: draft-mishra-6man-variable-slaac@ietf.org, 6man <ipv6@ietf.org>
References: <160409741426.1448.16934303750885888002@ietfa.amsl.com> <3c1c3ab5-5726-b141-e7ed-618984bbbdb1@gmail.com> <CABNhwV1zoZpZNjb54rEys4+49H3vpebZW2g9JbO1_58eR+WnQg@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr0vvyQnTGRoSh4qa4He1gq5HXXRaKU3pVLtCtDUzcwL_w@mail.gmail.com> <CAD6AjGQPatbg5=OaMzxJXy5mGZai1bqLfg8f+9SUnfg=s1kADg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <e55a9fbf-a93c-a96f-7991-f0c3aad8ce16@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 11:37:33 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAD6AjGQPatbg5=OaMzxJXy5mGZai1bqLfg8f+9SUnfg=s1kADg@mail.gmail.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/UHSmbfpp_eBIMJQ7lQZN0rNwNxo>
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, 04 Nov 2020 22:37:41 -0000

On 05-Nov-20 04:45, Ca By wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2020 at 12:52 AM Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org <mailto:40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>> wrote:
> 
>     On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 4:27 PM Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com <mailto:hayabusagsm@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>         It's hard to see why this draft is needed anyway. All that is needed
> 
>             is to remove the "64 bit" statement from the addressing architecture,
>             which the WG has consistently failed to reach consensus about.
> 
> 
>             Gyan>  This topic has come up many times over the years in heated debate and this is another instance of that.  Agreed.  However, what makes this instance different is that we have a major problem to be solved with 4G  &  now as 5G is rolled out, segmentation is of utmost importance.  I think in the past we have not had a major problem to be solved and so this change being proposed did not gain traction,  but now as 5G becomes the "norm" as it will compete directly with broadband that customers will start using 5G in SOHO as well as other environments.   This is a major issue that has come up with the ramp up for 5G IPv6 only deployments.
> 
> 
>     There is already a solution to this: use DHCPv6 PD on 5G networks. It's been supported since 3GPP release 10 several years ago.
> 
> 
> Has any mobile provider deployed dhcpv6 pd?
> 
> Perhaps the mobile providers have seen what an operational nightmare dhcpv6 pd is and... are like nope. 

Perhaps that needs to be documented over in v6ops.
 
> I am in favor of the ietf opening their eyes to a better solution. 
> 
> Rfc7278 is universally deployed because it is easy. 

As far as I can tell that is no use for the case of routed network connected to a hotspot, since there is still only one /64 prefix.
 
> Can we do better (more /64s) and easy ?

You mean multiple /64s for a single mobile device? Rather than fixing 3GPP to support shorter prefixes, which seems simpler.

    Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email