IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: Wireless ND was: about violation of standards

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Mon, 29 April 2019 12:53 UTC

Return-Path: <pthubert@cisco.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 BBE3612012B for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 05:53:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.5 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_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=izR4AVWC; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=DvncqZjJ
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 xCQRKXXqlWs5 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 05:53:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1172120025 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 05:53:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1850; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1556542409; x=1557752009; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=H/MS1zHL6WIcE9Xwxaxeakcwp0ONwcFHuPussMn7VFg=; b=izR4AVWCaT9cyXIKt9Sx+EeoGVp9GAQG8QvCaoB63AY5Tv+TrGc7LVum RWviSUhpne9ThHdelkEulXXDmTXJvT2N7O9htoQOYMUJV9ByPfUSS4Zr+ a0DTWZxXTGPqH0TUSgejq/+LrOsp0UIW8mEDN6LYLZZ6QFOkBxaiq+pZX 8=;
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:jIV3eBFzeZ3Ab49w4Ro5CZ1GYnJ96bzpIg4Y7IYmgLtSc6Oluo7vJ1Hb+e4z1Q3SRYuO7fVChqKWqK3mVWEaqbe5+HEZON0pNVcejNkO2QkpAcqLE0r+eeb2bzEwEd5efFRk5Hq8d0NSHZW2ag==
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AIAAC28sZc/49dJa1mGgEBAQEBAgEBAQEHAgEBAQGBUQUBAQEBCwGBPVADgT0gBAsoh1cDhFKKOoJXlyKBLoEkA1QOAQEthEAChjIjNAkOAQMBAQQBAQIBAm0cDIVKAQEBBBIoBgEBNwELBAIBCA4DBAEBHxAyHQgCBA4FCBqEagMcAQKiMAKBNYhfgiCCeQEBBYR5GIIOCYEyAYRhhmgXgUA/gRFGgkw+hB0pgzqCJqZ7CQKCCZJOlSegWgIEAgQFAg4BAQWBTziBVnAVgyeCD4NvilNygSmQP4JSAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,409,1549929600"; d="scan'208";a="264883885"
Received: from rcdn-core-7.cisco.com ([173.37.93.143]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 29 Apr 2019 12:53:28 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com (xch-aln-001.cisco.com [173.36.7.11]) by rcdn-core-7.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x3TCrSPl018613 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 29 Apr 2019 12:53:28 GMT
Received: from xhs-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.120) by XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com (173.36.7.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 07:53:27 -0500
Received: from xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) by xhs-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.120) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 07:53:27 -0500
Received: from NAM04-BN3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (64.101.32.56) by xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 08:53:26 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-cisco-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=VepzN820gj4P4VVIh7A67uc88W5BisXzvinX4kIbzMw=; b=DvncqZjJ6Ezvs/qMeYA0JrrGPeVwxXMwtMkXrBQk6Pea1G0VG0IvPE0j14sGOlIQl3Js/VGXLScns1ucUaTHvAi1QvzKHbcdXouEC/us196RVlAKbknjOD7dVW41ljtAXhpfJ2gdYsCQ7PvwvlvK4OrlJyg2rlgz1O9Z0mgB+Gw=
Received: from MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.178.250.159) by MN2PR11MB3968.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (10.255.180.32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1835.12; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 12:53:26 +0000
Received: from MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::68f6:21c8:b681:c73]) by MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::68f6:21c8:b681:c73%4]) with mapi id 15.20.1835.010; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 12:53:26 +0000
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
CC: Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-6@u-1.phicoh.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: Wireless ND was: about violation of standards
Thread-Topic: Wireless ND was: about violation of standards
Thread-Index: AQHU9hjz0VelQW2CM0S4qjQG7Nm8iaZCZ5mAgAAz6wCAAAwogIAAZyaogAZSawCAABw6IIAAFwgAgADV+ICAAESpAIAAGoiAgABMtvCABtsXeoAA9UYAgAAidqCAABa2gIAAARJA
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 12:53:00 +0000
Deferred-Delivery: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 12:52:27 +0000
Message-ID: <MN2PR11MB35652398D3D08D53FC053D0CD8390@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <bb7f7606-2adf-e669-8bcd-e41f17800782@gmail.com> <CAJE_bqd9frqX5-yeVPj8MYXpZ4737HqK1gmfD9cQV3A-Ea5HrQ@mail.gmail.com> <6bd5db47-408a-727e-5c13-f34a3465f986@si6networks.com> <CAJE_bqfTLqRbLp4fLu2ASZuZ+4G5c2G+RXkO92kXfLgPTqBnng@mail.gmail.com> <EEF00EA7-2AAF-403F-99AD-1D53ED18E8B3@cisco.com> <47631828-121F-402D-8165-969684C1101B@employees.org> <MN2PR11MB35655B36540829AEE5275964D8230@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <1066F69A-824F-4D6D-B221-8EFBAD15E15A@employees.org> <018c407a-b127-8724-d1ee-e19e3b084a60@gmail.com> <CABNhwV1jWHc1SMm=-xX0Oo5V4bo4VQBeQ5-CztJhP3y9006HRw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1904240659270.3490@uplift.swm.pp.se> <602A5CC5-170D-4E67-8907-A4D26606DB03@cisco.com> <m1hKoNd-0000IQC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <36910145-BFD1-40D6-B62A-B8EC70B692F6@employees.org> <MN2PR11MB35658F481A58E4F78D5B6648D8390@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <6080EB74-96C2-46ED-9411-16C9EBB32EA5@employees.org>
In-Reply-To: <6080EB74-96C2-46ED-9411-16C9EBB32EA5@employees.org>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=pthubert@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [2001:420:c0c0:1007::1d9]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 93eaa90b-b9d8-42be-fbb2-08d6cca1abc1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600141)(711020)(4605104)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:MN2PR11MB3968;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR11MB3968:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <MN2PR11MB39680CF6A25EF47353E27A2AD8390@MN2PR11MB3968.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:6790;
x-forefront-prvs: 0022134A87
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(376002)(136003)(396003)(39860400002)(366004)(346002)(189003)(199004)(13464003)(54906003)(52536014)(6916009)(256004)(6506007)(53546011)(86362001)(25786009)(7736002)(99286004)(102836004)(14444005)(4326008)(11346002)(68736007)(305945005)(7696005)(229853002)(476003)(76176011)(5660300002)(74316002)(446003)(316002)(81166006)(93886005)(6246003)(14454004)(6666004)(66476007)(71190400001)(55016002)(64756008)(66946007)(76116006)(66446008)(81156014)(9686003)(53936002)(46003)(8676002)(486006)(73956011)(4743002)(33656002)(66556008)(71200400001)(8936002)(6116002)(478600001)(186003)(6436002)(2906002)(97736004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:MN2PR11MB3968; H:MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: IfeBdKTYeUIoPuKJ6jXQVz4/Bwb/u/UBUu6JUbGYLE0fiP2dJtocUcSQTiekVipm2k9VgTqeVrh3S4FZg7kQGvqWu3x9+1aecETFJQCIPTHprBeDqJTQsx2Xx30m3h348lb56s7gSpzJmkNa255oLFuqBKm3SVAT6iW0IgYYLiQ12vntZ1VXIatPEa69DDVB3KpEKLDE6x2d2Z+x5xWowzWk4Vx4NJ/11SOaTnP3nwfw5/IprlIvwj+tcJL3LAxy+ZfzZ8f1hSu32/r/wPOV8DjSOeDCqH7ANVYpMP/7YowPMVoYQCCHeLKgtP+L/8Nn9iwI1VTq8cXTFAnzKQjw1WKedwBSSUQOELI+16IsV8W84cqNUUJCdu/rVsNQa+fDan40BSVaqyKKhIDiTb5Ei79mPWJqQTF1PDGgHUVNr24=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 93eaa90b-b9d8-42be-fbb2-08d6cca1abc1
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 29 Apr 2019 12:53:26.2151 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR11MB3968
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.11, xch-aln-001.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-7.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/bGYY27ZDYwaU7MXNlDXwxSjuim0>
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: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 12:53:32 -0000

Hello Ole

A radio mesh in our smartgrid deployments has thousands of nodes, each with 10s to 100 others in range. A key problem for the routing protocol is who should this node peer with, because you see, most of the possible peers are no added value and both energy and bandwidth are limited so even talking to them is a bad idea.

Even if we could e.g., by stretching homenet, nobody is willing to spend energy and bandwidth allocating prefixes to all the possible pairs or maintain as many addresses in all nodes.
Renumbering a meter means talking to a central application to indicate a new address. No one wants that either. 
Most nodes are both routers and termination points. And we often use source routing.  ULA/GUA is needed on every node.

For that use case:
- ULA/GUA are needed on all nodes
- one prefix per P2P is not feasible at scale
- one prefix per node is feasible but may consume thousands of /64, hard to justify in large scale. For that model, use the WiND hub and spoke on every node, and routing between them
- people usually go for a /64 per AP/root with nice side effects of compression and mobility so yes they route, but inside the subnet (MLSN). For that model, use the WiND route-over mode.

All the best,

Pascal

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
> Sent: lundi 29 avril 2019 14:21
> To: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert@cisco.com>
> Cc: Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-6@u-1.phicoh.com>; 6man WG
> <ipv6@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: Wireless ND was: about violation of standards
> 
> >> That was my thinking too. If you have a set of p2p links, you don't
> >> need very little of ND.
> 
> You need very little of ND. Was what I tried to say.
> E.g. address resolution wouldn't be needed.
> 
> Cheers,
> Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email