IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPv6] [v6ops] RFC for fec0:0:0:ffff::1?

"Dale W. Carder" <dwcarder@es.net> Wed, 30 November 2022 15:53 UTC

Return-Path: <dwcarder@es.net>
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 3648BC152706 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Nov 2022 07:53:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.095
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.095 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_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=es.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MgkEB7IZTypZ for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Nov 2022 07:52:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-io1-xd30.google.com (mail-io1-xd30.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d30]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B4A1C1522AC for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Nov 2022 07:52:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-io1-xd30.google.com with SMTP id g26so11924151iob.11 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Nov 2022 07:52:57 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=es.net; s=esnet-google; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=JN4rN7nPrLpZCudTjPy9VgbywVdHOeD0aFsLOteop6k=; b=mQeDGH1myedsoG/5lHMfqkXG5zG23g9PbZKgSj8Wo86gWq2o8DqzzL1vKsot54fJBb rKpanbYRS/GI27/7dev/Pst5+pe+BhvH03Hd1SsqSH5zx9ptSfbgiwkNKQR9+dEzebT1 poY8SF6KP2/RmY8pY1L8uRe4ONrdaycY0hbv/bGaYL5EgzHdKGkzwRXTohkxV0l4mgOj Kt5ZEVn0mDAxsCglax0d23WN1vBFMKsX+zuiQFmDV68PZMW6bFdDrCZu9ImVJ1vtV/jj KaE7jOWbvHewdBbqsZHK610IrymO66Dz1jT1StKR6+O04CzO7Za6eNbnzZ5sR07cgx3P ntCQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=JN4rN7nPrLpZCudTjPy9VgbywVdHOeD0aFsLOteop6k=; b=ej9YFxr3ftqp986P62/c+pPejNl128yrytugvor9a2lbmABWO4XPPAA0F0ei0Ik0OU wRPHWBkdm2UZL+C9QRbBhlPZsqKeZPDO4fJ7SZwfu1J+1uvfAaUfuxqW91ALkRM6EAkG 9xQyl9Zm0dZRl1wZWbSnIZitV3r/x8clrf9xzq52MEM/+BnEUqkV1lu9WVo7ujU9SHpS c57v96SbxVxefr7H12YrFAqUjTVZLZzAomVzmtHwBKk18wyHEPQBB6YQwoNpJ63eKfPV wEEqZBPaDVnGWaEg4FgySUv0Xt1JYcrcGgNIctpdJ5s6tt0WQ32YBKYigwXPdRSp276W YsCw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5plnNM5MooHlzVAsSRpVKKQuAkwa9ckuilD3rP4s16gS+70HOMMo GkRpZXYPppb0hNQSvn1shIpViOyWV/3884JczGQrI0ZVmd13EFyRBLk28WWOnd/5SeScEB0gmpT j2xKC5vm73aW4UIj8WTS3AGn71VD0n5hG4+AEa9JDDBcEwo9Om10UTET25s4Rm7sw3w==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf6zag5f9M4783NMkUWEAyqOOiaFF1Ve7jheS13I9P7T20gx3qIjGH8oSOftwbQrZUDEmjGWog==
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:8b05:0:b0:6bb:e2f0:d5e9 with SMTP id k5-20020a5d8b05000000b006bbe2f0d5e9mr21972831ion.119.1669823575509; Wed, 30 Nov 2022 07:52:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([2600:6c44:5f7f:b901:7804:1e0:31a3:129d]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w2-20020a025d02000000b00387c86afdbasm694094jaa.95.2022.11.30.07.52.54 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 30 Nov 2022 07:52:54 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2022 09:52:53 -0600
From: "Dale W. Carder" <dwcarder@es.net>
To: Klaus Frank <klaus.frank@posteo.de>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, ipv6@ietf.org
Message-ID: <Y4d8VaEbNV43BGRl@dwc-laptop-2.local>
References: <324539dd-37f6-fbd9-ea98-c51320f38603@posteo.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <324539dd-37f6-fbd9-ea98-c51320f38603@posteo.de>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/Zjeo9Rjsob0FQ5kTAjVDlLwx7zU>
Subject: Re: [IPv6] [v6ops] RFC for fec0:0:0:ffff::1?
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 30 Nov 2022 15:53:01 -0000

Thus spake Klaus Frank (klaus.frank@posteo.de) on Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 04:08:07AM +0000:
> does anyone know what RFC is responsible for the IPv6 DNS server
> configuration on all windows clients defaulting to fec0:0:0:ffff::1, I was
> unable to find any. Nor is it listed in the iana special-purpose address
> registry.
> 
> I however found a draft (draft-ietf-ipv6-0dns-discovery-07) from 2002, but
> no actual RFC.

That draft matches my memory.  Recall that was well before rfc5006 
which was quite late to the party to address a glaring oversight
as the ra vs dhcpv6 holy wars raged on.

Having well-known resolver addresses be site-local (and anycasted, 
despite what the draft claims on that issue) could have been a 
logical design pattern for local networks.  

But more generally, no two people could ever be expected to agree on 
a common definition of what a "site" is.  rfc3879 documents the pain 
very well.  (see a generalized incarnation of this issue in rfc8799).  

Dale

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email