IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Informed regulator about the shorter-than-64 necessity on 3G/4G/5G

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Tue, 19 January 2021 00:02 UTC

Return-Path: <fgont@si6networks.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 BE7AD3A0CE9 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 16:02:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.161
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.161 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.262, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 anuST1icAZEx for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 16:02:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fgont.go6lab.si (fgont.go6lab.si [91.239.96.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD3C63A0CE7 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 16:02:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2800:810:464:2b9:110e:44b4:87d:7639] (unknown [IPv6:2800:810:464:2b9:110e:44b4:87d:7639]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by fgont.go6lab.si (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DB00328096E; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 00:02:23 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: Informed regulator about the shorter-than-64 necessity on 3G/4G/5G
To: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>, IPv6 <ipv6@ietf.org>
References: <616b05ca-1a02-dfbd-d7f6-c79f56276fa1@gmail.com>
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Message-ID: <f300119e-0233-c711-207e-6962d67e87bd@si6networks.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 19:04:12 -0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <616b05ca-1a02-dfbd-d7f6-c79f56276fa1@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/Uy-NDQ7mHm2fnhlLY4TYZQn0KNo>
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: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 00:02:32 -0000

Hi, Alex,

On 18/1/21 05:45, Alexandre Petrescu wrote:
> Hi, 6MANners,
> 
> Today I formulated a brief personal email to some person(s) at the
> regulator agency suggesting the allocation of shorter-than-64 prefixes
> (e.g. /56) to end users.
> 
> I explained that the current situation where each of the mobile
> operators deliver a /64 and not shorter to smartphones is not usable for
> networks such as mobile hotspots or in-car multi-subnet networks.
> 
> I informed that there are some I-D proposals of Variable SLAAC that is
> relatively refused at IETF because of the IETF necessity of 64bit (and
> not shorter) IIDs.

This seems to be confusing things.

Proposals for "classless IPv6" (e.g.: 
draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6) are meant to allow SLAAC to work 
with *longer* prefixes (i.e., shorter IIDs)

Shorter prefixes (i.e., bigger address blocks leased to users) are 
already supported by DHCPv6-PD, without the need of any additional 
protocol action.

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email