IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6-00

神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp> Mon, 05 June 2017 22:48 UTC

Return-Path: <jinmei.tatuya@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 89C70127775 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Jun 2017 15:48:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-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 bpDLXCDhCtVN for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Jun 2017 15:48:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt0-x22a.google.com (mail-qt0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22a]) (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 7925A120721 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Jun 2017 15:48:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id u19so49838653qta.3 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 05 Jun 2017 15:48:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=8Sr9W9s4N83qpLNm5izZ6dkuzaDNgVdRI1YxXffMr1w=; b=O5lR0kBUCRjeSZxR0jwZx2vD6rKIYEuh8JuNSgHKct0T8t/qSHsrma09fx280STRPQ +R9ZCNSrjmVBkCvXYDxblvYLFoiYRb5vjmF32rAq+tZ1mF+q3ldSWkkdiHASl5Hi4Xbw HMbSVdTMF8b/A15thQCtHXqEA1gV1Sw8DZsjvOoNewPADas6bsEIoxbtWPmZwz7Hi0/N tfz7vFUMfkK3sL4gV/4FU2Ptfpxi5hl2piGF6SkeMwBtv3JMg7EloJin0guvYZ53LJfB yRNKnxkMxAXlGZtSjLT88P+egkCoLoUFedNCIJnvOK601HCDYS6lmMbqaMheqJbE0Xfz hQkQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=8Sr9W9s4N83qpLNm5izZ6dkuzaDNgVdRI1YxXffMr1w=; b=Fo0mD481ZJKTQWLncRo5yWbyT+cVDaGnoq7h/6wkLV8tE+6oN3eKB9dQASc8TBQ7es +qiUU69FlasyL/0x/qZMYNoqSF9qbzCoa+Ec52XBEVnNu7gEeJbtkyzff2SoVx69b4+j QTwLMYkLvPwMq1f5mhhGMvmwYsQT7snBMSmJZDxlD58Dp1jmrsfuES+JO8CI8VExx2gV fmwpuPHWN89UWYEVyRUb/IA71jLM+I78lLiU9yl5U3se6fgkocPH/Y7DnEyXalfq6VfF 6NA5UT/RVbEoGNh0BirHII7bIhKQsbX1vkg3LGWAf+yWUZO9dt9eHpmB5UQkEsah91Ba iEbA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOw0K/sSTzLG8YXDLatrn2fxXBS4NFNWlLUEFaIBXo+xEk9nWGVq V7778DuDnrEPQ5LH2KjvoehwGEABzQ==
X-Received: by 10.55.22.193 with SMTP id 62mr25482186qkw.242.1496702934461; Mon, 05 Jun 2017 15:48:54 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: jinmei.tatuya@gmail.com
Received: by 10.237.60.53 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Jun 2017 15:48:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4021a559-5b6d-b3fb-19cd-afbe9041e8f2@gmail.com>
References: <20170602141112.x64nleqclygz7dwd@Vurt.local> <20170602141259.GD30896@gir.theapt.org> <CAKD1Yr0DtQYvCYLQexhXe_nhb5rjeyhnB4bCveqyO5Xbuwdg1A@mail.gmail.com> <CAKFn1SEdjhsQ3tKPZdbdfF4ArDzw-FZfjQT68gV55Fc-5vzBvw@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr3ppM0UF8HoN8PgS7F0iEmK26ebiuJK=tkAdZnuLWpkZg@mail.gmail.com> <CAKFn1SHASt34ihJmGN0iRFQQzLTMspZfxXHgBjBatXXcRYF4cw@mail.gmail.com> <20170604093119.nt733rb3ymmjssww@Vurt.local> <m1dHTLx-0000DcC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <CAKD1Yr0ZZwRar6D-2bkXBKPYehqqW99+BMtDOjyovR8WDXKzxw@mail.gmail.com> <CAD6AjGTjikAWutcenW8qn7OW8kPM9c_x_yDUy5vQxJmXKL85dg@mail.gmail.com> <91c3c0f4-eb8b-cdf7-b9c9-7d1eecb7fe64@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr0_WR_TB+OC0U1Qt2h6WzUp9EGvrqC1ZKW2mwFeBd3bCQ@mail.gmail.com> <4021a559-5b6d-b3fb-19cd-afbe9041e8f2@gmail.com>
From: 神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp>
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2017 15:48:53 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: qo8k0ShZY2cIvWAdYf73ESLY_ng
Message-ID: <CAJE_bqcDr86Srqm39D3TewahNzvfNY5OdpF-rYEknOHNWfjfeQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6-00
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Cc: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>, IETF IPv6 Mailing List <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/WsoCesF9QlJ8MXpGVb-Q5VhRraU>
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: Mon, 05 Jun 2017 22:48:56 -0000

At Tue, 6 Jun 2017 10:25:20 +1200,
Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:

> > It *is* a parameter. The parameter's value is 64 for all unicast addresses
> > except those starting with 000.

> The parameter's *current* value, yes. But should we really be fixing
> the value of the parameter once and for all in the addressing architecture?
> Why don't we fix it in each IPv6-over-foo, which is what the SLAAC design
> assumes?

Is this what this draft tries to propose?  Then the number will be
still 64 in most links used today anyway according to RFC2464.  My
initial impression of the draft is that it even tries to remove that
number for IPv6-over-Ethernet, or even make it independent from
IPv6-over-foo but subject to operator's choice.

If the proposal is really to make the length of the interface
identifier only dependent on IPv6-over-foo (but not on the addressing
architecture spec anymore), I think the draft should explicitly state
so.  I'd still expect a lot of discussion on that proposal, but it
will at least help avoid having some of the controversy we're seeing
in this very long thread.

--
JINMEI, Tatuya

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email