Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host)
Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Sun, 12 November 2017 01:54 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 766AB124BFA; Sat, 11 Nov 2017 17:54:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-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 XN--dakUueuP; Sat, 11 Nov 2017 17:54:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fgont.go6lab.si (fgont.go6lab.si [91.239.96.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF819129412; Sat, 11 Nov 2017 17:54:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:67c:1232:144:8016:582c:2bf0:48c4] (unknown [IPv6:2001:67c:1232:144:8016:582c:2bf0:48c4]) (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 5E795800DD; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 02:53:56 +0100 (CET)
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host)
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org, "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>, Enno Rey <erey@ernw.de>
References: <be9724f5-2ff5-d90c-2749-ecae2c628b78@si6networks.com> <CAKD1Yr0_a2Qm8U4oK+BQU57DeDUD9i-o_+G+YhnH4pVXRxmxxQ@mail.gmail.com> <9d154133-a1de-7774-1589-c7069bf279ee@si6networks.com> <0b45890d-ea4a-47b8-a650-ceb72b066df8@gmail.com> <ea772bfd-4004-7f94-8469-b50e3aff0f29@si6networks.com> <F2330138-6842-4C38-B5A0-FB40BFACD038@employees.org> <e40697ca-8017-c9d2-c25d-89087046c9cf@gmail.com>
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Message-ID: <e3c690ee-b0b0-07a0-46ec-1ed92f29a7d5@si6networks.com>
Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2017 22:49:23 -0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <e40697ca-8017-c9d2-c25d-89087046c9cf@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/bQrWE11ag5vYfplaYsSjARbzya0>
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: Sun, 12 Nov 2017 01:54:03 -0000
On 11/10/2017 07:26 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > On 11/11/2017 09:42, Ole Troan wrote: >>> 1) My comment to the list was essentially arguing that this document >>> contains a protocol specification, and such part is not suitable. I >>> think it should be easy to converge on something regarding this one: >>> >>> Can anyone (you, for instance), provide a definition of what is a >>> protocol, and the run this document through such definition and figure >>> out if it fits or it doesn't? >> >> >> A protocol is a system of rules that allow _two_ or more nodes to communicate. >> The protocol specifies the syntax, semantics and so on (1). >> >> A protocol specification does not specify only the wire format. >> >> 'unique-ipv6-prefix' does not specify changes in the wire-format, nor its semantics. >> It only requires implementation change on one 'side' of the protocol, namely on the routers. >> From that perspective I think you can argue that this is not a protocol specification. > > I agree with that, and other versions of the same argument. That certainly does not agree with my conception of what a protocol is, which falls well under what was expressed on-list by Joe Touch. If any of the FSMs that you can employ to model the protocol has changed, you have changed the protocol. > (That also > answers Fernando's message directed at me, so I won't waste more bits.) > > More on the philosophy side of the argument, WG Charters are a tool to > allow the chairs and AD to control mission creep. They aren't sacred > texts. So IMHO the real question is not whether this is strictly speaking > a protocol extension, but whether it's a useful thing for the IETF to > publish. The "philosophy" of my comment is as follows: * What is the document changes the SLAAC protocol, and maes SLAAC more brittle: SLAAC is generaly resilient to a router rebooting, whereas, with this protocol, it likely won't. * There are a bunch of other aspects, from interoperability to security, that have been ignored. The document just mentions "oh, we send the multicasted RAs to unicast link-layer addresses" and essentially omits way more cucial stuff, including: how do you time-out prefixes? How do you generate them? What do you do when you don't have any more prefixes to give away? And many others. Even if this same document/text was being done in 6man, the protocol spec part is a half-baked protocol specification. Even more, claiming that this *mechanism* a bcp, is quite a bold statement when, as noted, there's *lots* that has been omitted. * I would expect that the "beef" in a document is in what the wg ships -- the rest is improvements. So, given that the protocol spec part of this document was added after IETF LC, in a group that is not meant to do Std Track documents, and given the issues mentioned above, I think the protocol spec part in Section 4 is out of place. * As a *side* comment/note: IPv6 automatic configuration is quite a mess in a number of aspects (including <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-gont-6man-slaac-dns-config-issues-01.txt>, and <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem-07>). Publishing mechanism that is not even fully-specified and, even more, flagging it as "bcp" just adds on top to that. I'd really also like to see what's the criteria for specifying features in SLAAC and DHCPv6. For instance... is the plan to duplicate in both as much functionality as possible? Or... do we just love SLAAC and will incorporate into SLAAC everything that would make us otherwise use DHCPv6? If there's something available in one protocol (slaac or dhcv6) but not in the other, and the feature is deemed as needed... should we use such protocol or just figure out what to do to somehow implement such feature in our belove one? e.g. in this case, if what you want is a prefix, why don't you use prefix delegation? And if the goal is just to isolate nodes, set L=0 in the RAs, and so be it. Thanks, -- Fernando Gont SI6 Networks e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
- Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-pref… Fernando Gont
- Re: Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-… DY Kim
- Re: Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-… Erik Kline
- Re: Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-… Erik Kline
- Re: Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-… Warren Kumari
- Re: Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-… Fernando Gont
- Re: Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-… Fernando Gont
- RE: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Templin, Fred L
- Re: Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Brian E Carpenter
- RE: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Mark Smith
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… james woodyatt
- Re: Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-… Fred Baker
- Re: Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-… Fred Baker
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Joe Touch
- Re: Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… joel jaeggli
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ole Troan
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… David Farmer
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ole Troan
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ole Troan
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… james woodyatt
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Joe Touch
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Joe Touch
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Joe Touch
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… DY Kim
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… DY Kim
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ted Lemon
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… DY Kim
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… DY Kim
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ted Lemon
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ted Lemon
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… DY Kim
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… DY Kim
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ted Lemon
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… DY Kim
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Warren Kumari
- Re: Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… DY Kim
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Bob Hinden
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Nick Hilliard
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Erik Nordmark
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ted Lemon
- RE: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ole Troan
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ted Lemon
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Bob Hinden
- RE: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ted Lemon
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Erik Nordmark
- RE: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ole Troan
- RE: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ole Troan
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ted Lemon
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… DaeYoung KIM
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Erik Nordmark
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Mark Smith
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Enno Rey
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ted Lemon
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ole Troan
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ted Lemon
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ole Troan
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ted Lemon
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Bernie Volz (volz)
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Nick Hilliard
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Victor Kuarsingh
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Victor Kuarsingh
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Victor Kuarsingh
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Victor Kuarsingh
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ted Lemon
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ole Troan
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Victor Kuarsingh
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ted Lemon
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Michael H Lambert
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Philip Homburg
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… David Farmer
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Nick Hilliard
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Nick Hilliard
- RE: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Templin, Fred L
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… james woodyatt
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Mark Smith
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Fred Baker
- DHCPv6 PD route injection (was: Re: [v6ops] State… Ole Troan
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ted Lemon
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ted Lemon
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ted Lemon
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Ted Lemon
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… james woodyatt
- RE: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Suresh Krishnan
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Warren Kumari
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… DY Kim
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Fred Baker
- Re: [v6ops] DHCPv6 PD route injection (was: Re: S… Brzozowski, John
- Upleveling discussion (was Re: [v6ops] Stateful S… Suresh Krishnan
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… DY Kim
- Re: Upleveling discussion (was Re: [v6ops] Statef… Erik Nordmark
- Re: [v6ops] Upleveling discussion (was Re: Statef… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… David Farmer
- Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-uniq… David Farmer
- Re: Upleveling discussion (was Re: [v6ops] Statef… james woodyatt
- Re: [v6ops] Upleveling discussion (was Re: Statef… Gert Doering
- Re: Upleveling discussion (was Re: [v6ops] Statef… Fernando Gont