IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Confirmation to advance: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6only-flag-05

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Sat, 11 May 2019 07:11 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 2411A1200F3 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 11 May 2019 00:11:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.301
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.301 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-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 2aKj60Im6QUA for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 11 May 2019 00:11:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (ipv6.swm.pp.se [IPv6:2a00:801::f]) (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 A02B212007A for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 11 May 2019 00:11:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 686D4B2; Sat, 11 May 2019 09:11:44 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1557558704; bh=V4Sj8uJBZXFW+o9OPNJWuzl+rNF7YG6YuEd/UIa7PsY=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=r1XLihyTZa/hOHRm8rV8l1dOloovNd+OfV2w7+WMPufp55PNphMdhV0lWDK7F0Zl1 2ggPAxwQiwUNfvkZCP7WVntRpWUMkUgN1ZyCyJY528ZLqGIx/xU+j79GubrJZwc8TI /RkRfVA1C0eDjFYUk6XouAI7yCC715B7EJsnJ26A=
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63986B1; Sat, 11 May 2019 09:11:44 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Sat, 11 May 2019 09:11:44 +0200
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>
cc: David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>, Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>
Subject: Re: Confirmation to advance: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6only-flag-05
In-Reply-To: <CAO42Z2zeH1pOfMb=xbLw79LcNnQdnifbM5BFxewx7317-SF_cA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1905110905350.1824@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <F8BFFCAD-E58E-4736-8A1C-56579B6F6032@employees.org> <c7e18765-be04-6494-8193-984dbccb520b@foobar.org> <CANMZLAYh+V57yrWOzmUyjSMK0g95u1D5_GZmyZBMOMKAZnrnCg@mail.gmail.com> <3F474511-6FE3-4A0A-9B84-7C37F08FBB5D@steffann.nl> <E352C226-C708-4418-BCDE-10525CAB109A@jisc.ac.uk> <652fb10e-b8ce-0151-a9a0-62d2378caed2@gmail.com> <0079c716-d56c-7199-f493-f5e56e1307ae@foobar.org> <b33de303-eaca-f7f6-804e-2c9343eb92a1@gmail.com> <6C4ABEF1-2565-4BA9-9FC5-5B3C45A719AD@gmail.com> <c2222416-6491-1906-a403-d012777a4b38@gmail.com> <CABNhwV0-SdKZqQa4z9jhpc8h1Eq=8UxRhtvHt1==BYEMTVRjug@mail.gmail.com> <96790121-7D50-4C6F-924F-87065B989E44@gmail.com> <ccab3694-54f2-bdd1-f8ac-cb159dbc0a81@gont.com.ar> <CAN-Dau0_w0n9C6grqi1bXAL-k239K7RMiQyhx5=c-Y_wqrV2OQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAO42Z2wwftO6wtF7PAJ9CCK2iBvtOj0BQP7O0UREr-pMmPegvQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAN-Dau2brdJ98bzFO76j+C=RCZSFpNg-eW0WCz_FYp9C_YSMjQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAO42Z2zeH1pOfMb=xbLw79LcNnQdnifbM5BFxewx7317-SF_cA@mail.gmail.com>
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/YwHMWWZDbE6e3JEY2TvwTSZ6dIk>
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: Sat, 11 May 2019 07:11:49 -0000

On Sat, 11 May 2019, Mark Smith wrote:

> I think this is going backwards. We already prefer IPv6 over IPv4 by 
> default in terms of address selection and in happy eyeballs.
>
> IPv4 is the legacy protocol, delaying its startup until IPv6 has been 
> initialised is consistent with the IPv6 preference.

Device manufacturers won't do it that way. My take on it is that they will 
do along the lines of what Apple did with their HE deployment. They'll 
start off no advantage for either protocol, gather data, then change to 
delay IPv4 slightly and then perhaps in 10-50 years if IPv6-only with 
IPv4aaS becomes the norm then just use IPv4 as fallback in case IPv6 
doesn't work properly.

We should not mandate anything here about exact device behaviour, we 
should say "this is a signal from the network that the network 
administrator is indicating that this is an IPv6 only network". That's all 
it is, and now the device manufacturer can decide depending on their 
use-case what is the best way to respond to this signal for that 
particular device.

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email