IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> Mon, 05 June 2017 07:54 UTC

Return-Path: <lorenzo@google.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 6A459126D05 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Jun 2017 00:54:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 Lobvsmdl0mSO for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Jun 2017 00:54:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vk0-x22a.google.com (mail-vk0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::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 C986F129BAC for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Jun 2017 00:54:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vk0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id p85so62476489vkd.3 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 05 Jun 2017 00:54:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=YoVXDU0la3XLpZDcA/ctERHqyBdEUp3PR9yrMSNT9v0=; b=TVF5MnWPFr5Rh9RzQMOXOty5cUqI4rJ4apK66/xoWaAw05MtKhFOlWlS1pLjfh82GQ 84vcodVvU98C0xlcb4X/CuDmVfiCT8zmav6Zkaf93yRw89NLyLTyqYh6JHIGvtPVYJ32 Ct2fXm/LdxB1jGc/wxrQPinM0EAh01OaXzvk6xAFbGKn+CXRKup+7pjI6HarzDpu7u0j HF6VErqR+euP2fLlmPYjUpaGcZejel8azN7zVVQx59cGncOIEk6RTZwJM0OBW+H+G/rd lyHJRR8s3NvG4G7y6QzbUcwVsytURnEfizhiVlP6/vSh6zRgHo7ybcpLRYAyxxIU9YyK 5yUg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=YoVXDU0la3XLpZDcA/ctERHqyBdEUp3PR9yrMSNT9v0=; b=qTKmFTxfexQQTD4I9Dm1fPjYwqornq/5ZXjH9S+aZHKYETCP2O0Ja0PMsxJRK1EXZI 1lUBOhbcrJfV+7BiWtakl6iJDN0STupBECpay8Cvf8j8B18UjJ+H5PmXqDB+J/UA0Yfa JRczllUd/z7GUmg1bWB8trlbw2VbJ3DL1uUMKsv6y3+2SG7t2M+3Myl8qaXeVR82aFrf npnNAKtJeCanTo4UkzPemDXK1n0P+yjiFcZilvdjtRKHuJ+thBtuwEdxnyfgbTu5VASd Qbyr2edVlOo22CeXdHe58p4tY6qtZ/LeLxNejCPxH9MLgWXKNLknwZDFOJVzA/e4j94X BydQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcAroSZT2b8Aw21XoIelDYBOWdz96WO2PQogYjDfIplUl90uVXCT SFPS1STDQiqgXjaAIp/kwhZ72bppXdPryOA=
X-Received: by 10.31.69.138 with SMTP id s132mr6334141vka.13.1496649262615; Mon, 05 Jun 2017 00:54:22 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.31.12.139 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Jun 2017 00:54:01 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20170605072343.GO30896@gir.theapt.org>
References: <20170602141112.x64nleqclygz7dwd@Vurt.local> <CALx6S34y1ZS95dD6Qv5A90RnKwh2NqC=VDaZ2vSq+zpo5+NpUg@mail.gmail.com> <5932DA16.9040008@foobar.org> <CAKD1Yr3HkiAweix3fhxT2+9moj7eP2AGRtf7hESpOKihKMCUOg@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S36b_8z2_vi4T8ZNKs72v5rKAR9YpBWz+r+xb-J-yO4sfQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr0s9TN3dYayhzKqX58yMC39vhGxcVi8+c3b2_VPNiyxwQ@mail.gmail.com> <20170604124829.GI30896@gir.theapt.org> <CAKD1Yr0g7F5Tq5AFw001dbyfVEbQNFRtrUy+YowdoKhLtnjS4w@mail.gmail.com> <20170604132200.GK30896@gir.theapt.org> <CAAedzxqD26692u-3WT3UMa8ojdq+39Zyyszf7xj1h9r54Z6=hA@mail.gmail.com> <20170605072343.GO30896@gir.theapt.org>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2017 16:54:01 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKD1Yr1UpU377u64uEs1b3AwwvfOM8NGK0rvn5yk+XGgbAKj=Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6-00
To: IETF IPv6 Mailing List <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114dd2d2a75351055131cf89"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/_AAYNe-mqnNIgb3BPn5HiAcm2BI>
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 07:54:25 -0000

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Peter Hessler <phessler@theapt.org> wrote:

> This draft is requesting that the standards reflect reality,


I don't think longer-than-64 IIDs are an appreciable portion of reality.
The number of IPv6 prefixes in use every day is well into the hundreds of
millions. The number of non-/64 IIDs is likely a rounding error in
comparison.


> and acknolwedge that non-/64 subnets are legal.


What is legal is what is written in the standards, and it's /64. What is
implemented may vary. Lots of devices allow configuration of longer prefix
lengths. Lots of devices don't.


> This group has tried to force the standards to require only /64 subnets
> and that is, quite frankly, offensive.
>

I think that's incorrect. "Has tried" is incorrect because /64 has been the
current state of the standards for about 20 years. "This group" is
incorrect because a lot of the people who made those decisions are no
longer in this group. They have just been replaced by other people who
happen to agree that that decision was a good one.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email