IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: 64share v2

otroan@employees.org Wed, 11 November 2020 12:58 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
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 B35FE3A10D4 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 04:58:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 SKGtVxWyxH1m for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 04:58:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from clarinet.employees.org (clarinet.employees.org [198.137.202.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7888A3A10D2 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 04:58:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from astfgl.hanazo.no (201.51-175-101.customer.lyse.net [51.175.101.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by clarinet.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0D4A64E11A6A; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 12:58:38 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by astfgl.hanazo.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8544643CC2ED; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:58:35 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\))
Subject: Re: 64share v2
From: otroan@employees.org
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr1JJkCN=EJrYbffHQCBazT2Sky2wgWHsiKnztKWMKgJJg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:58:35 +0100
Cc: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike=40swm.pp.se@dmarc.ietf.org>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <01BFA374-F40E-4247-BCFF-59E14F1B35C2@employees.org>
References: <CAD6AjGR-NE_sJ_jp7nAT6OvNkcdE9qoWuGEiiVW7r9YtsQvbbw@mail.gmail.com> <80ed3a3b-6e2c-188f-4c1e-c2ededfbbe0d@joelhalpern.com> <0188AC41-60B0-4BC6-810D-DC59CF9E4FB3@employees.org> <1931a638-64ed-f40e-07a3-67cf1eafb941@joelhalpern.com> <376D6BB0-87E2-42E5-9BC4-F3A2F04FA005@employees.org> <CAD6AjGSr-TPcGo7f9EGgoAahYLQTL68CUSq58LGMgD0=6GmRRg@mail.gmail.com> <8DC674FB-9F90-4C41-A323-62BD62934A12@employees.org> <CAD6AjGTYBs8YbHgCJJG84vgwXK4ZSCm65z6KXvZP9F+LdT_atg@mail.gmail.com> <CAD6AjGTQVtJBJ3=aZBsF1WcdSK2k9b1hzeZXM6008w_2vpo6_w@mail.gmail.com> <948ACA2B-E45C-4289-A837-9F2536F20F8F@employees.org> <CAKD1Yr0tDTSH2F4=ZsdMJREy1k6equ9mZV0Au1bJPmKuzxeYVA@mail.gmail.com> <43C449AD-D116-4452-A4F2-79AE5A76539F@employees.org> <m1kcoXQ-0000G1C@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <alpine.DEB.2.20.2011111248460.15604@uplift.swm.pp.se> <C979855B-894F-4BB8-8CE9-FDDD4C51AB68@employees.org> <alpine.DEB.2.20.2011111337570.15604@uplift.swm.pp.se> <CAKD1Yr1JJkCN=EJrYbffHQCBazT2Sky2wgWHsiKnztKWMKgJJg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/VpQ-MC3la9VOsqXdrMnwfcGv9xY>
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, 11 Nov 2020 12:58:40 -0000

> > It's unclear what the act would imply here though.
> > Resending RS?
> 
> That's one thing one can do. Basically if the old world view seems to not 
> be correct anymore, re-discover. So if you before discovered the world 
> with RS+DHCPv6+DHCP, retry them all. Worst thing that can happen is that 
> you end up with same world view again. Best thing that can happen is that 
> you discover that your old world view no longer is correct and you 
> discover a new one.
> 
> Do we really need to solve this problem in order to solve the problem of how to distribute the information? Or rather - do we need to solve the problems together, in the same draft?

I thought the answer to that was no when writing RFC3315. In hindsight leaving those musky corner cases out was a mistake.
If there is a chance that state will be lost in the PE, we should specify a way for the CE to detect it. Otherwise you'd live the site blackholed.

Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email