IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Adoption Call for "Improving the Robustness of Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC) to Flash Renumbering Events"

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Tue, 07 July 2020 19:35 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 301573A09DB for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 12:35:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 AATFZ3w9Sekh for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 12:35:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fgont.go6lab.si (fgont.go6lab.si [IPv6:2001:67c:27e4::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 253B83A0A00 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 12:35:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2800:810:464:1f7:9cfa:8ea5:678c:1b1d] (unknown [IPv6:2800:810:464:1f7:9cfa:8ea5:678c:1b1d]) (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 D002E283921; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 19:34:40 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: Adoption Call for "Improving the Robustness of Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC) to Flash Renumbering Events"
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>, Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com>
Cc: IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
References: <CAFU7BAQX8B2n3FFjQ3h-9VLP7zR=zy0nO0z7bEtz3KXZ7wp=eg@mail.gmail.com> <DD303CF7-189B-41D1-B905-A5C26239BF03@fugue.com>
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Message-ID: <b8df519a-79dc-1117-32dc-8c7e7f221fed@si6networks.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2020 16:25:17 -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: <DD303CF7-189B-41D1-B905-A5C26239BF03@fugue.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/XaSpCG-8_oczBQZb9s7_5dl5J3Q>
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, 07 Jul 2020 19:35:31 -0000

On 7/7/20 11:11, Ted Lemon wrote:
> It might be worth thinking about how it would be different than the current behavior, when stale information is present and new, valid information is being advertised but not reliably heard. Do things get worse or better with this change?

We have done the associated assessment. And things do indeed get better. 
If Jen is referring to Section 4.5 (which I am assuming, since she 
didn't say), the mitigation makse sure that stale information is phased 
out *only* if there's new incoming information.

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