Re: 64share v2

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Tue, 10 November 2020 11:36 UTC

Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
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 705623A082F for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 03:36:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=swm.pp.se
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 K7Xbja8z1nJO for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 03:36:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (swm.pp.se [212.247.200.143]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E3503A08AF for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 03:36:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 34137B1; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 12:36:02 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1605008162; bh=x0bwK0VMPDcoORkuay539JDW3ONST8YGT2Xy3R/E3Vk=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=osEwa1oUgELUjFsDaxyUJ6kVGmM9TgSX5Rug88m6YHDyfC5SvcG1WlV6PtOtUDzeV c2hsb/2wxzeOeBcdK8m7ZzwymK5TzsMDmmsBZIzp3YYpmaGF0MU+HtjZgwpHJHoLAG sYtv/8IYQyQe+64MW/q9FVIz3kmAYX+exMZar/tI=
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32629B0; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 12:36:02 +0100 (CET)
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 12:36:02 +0100 (CET)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: otroan@employees.org
cc: 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: 64share v2
In-Reply-To: <55A3AF63-83FF-4D1B-8B18-AD2E7C35E441@employees.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.2011101234290.15604@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <CAD6AjGR-NE_sJ_jp7nAT6OvNkcdE9qoWuGEiiVW7r9YtsQvbbw@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr0G8PjzE+pULte_AaOi=RHMLyto-YUQerGjQ=iOYnz+iA@mail.gmail.com> <0986B112-2159-4045-87F9-876B58F1D896@employees.org> <CAKD1Yr0h9=7p+n=qnH1o1EHqtPrsaYebgvHciOJpP3=iXgNgKQ@mail.gmail.com> <0C739112-D8EA-42C3-BEFD-88C014D5BCD0@employees.org> <CAKD1Yr3Xr2t8yN40kmq6S+gSMPMDkm6cVXaVM+doW-xPo_BTrQ@mail.gmail.com> <55A3AF63-83FF-4D1B-8B18-AD2E7C35E441@employees.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/WKtJndzYWy_hUrl3mOo1rHMPToE>
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, 10 Nov 2020 11:36:20 -0000

On Tue, 10 Nov 2020, otroan@employees.org wrote:

> In an arbitrary topology, i.e. with multiple routers and hosts.
> Why do you do think this will work?

This problem exists regardless of how the prefix is delegated or how big 
it is. There is always the requirement to send zero preferred times down 
the topology and also to support flash renumbering.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se