IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IPv6 Anycast has been killed by LINUX patch in 2016 - who cares?

Töma Gavrichenkov <ximaera@gmail.com> Sun, 08 August 2021 01:06 UTC

Return-Path: <ximaera@gmail.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 508F63A1104; Sat, 7 Aug 2021 18:06:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=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=gmail.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 8nSSMX77mYGm; Sat, 7 Aug 2021 18:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ed1-x529.google.com (mail-ed1-x529.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::529]) (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 BABAB3A1102; Sat, 7 Aug 2021 18:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ed1-x529.google.com with SMTP id x90so18973996ede.8; Sat, 07 Aug 2021 18:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=wAQXanTGYyTF/grV3FrUDWlh2RmsRxPJhb2A9A/8c3g=; b=Zk8xmJS76LLjQGXipTAAP1+UPIJS5MrpHnRxLl5/JeUk+KAo1Qb5OlDjDgpYLzRxGo UBZfm+SMV0KHZhnQRiy5EOhlWGdPb+nmOpFFEvS3OOoxUETSJqdRUqxjoZGyGlupeflI 3wl9M0nPZAghlJxOlapEKLi5t38qP89HMdjSFqtQ8L/I+ZMSHrYMNCHCKgRfzmOSbOCq nOx3Qer/EsGznr7esi/uxhGpdzRLYFVLpNFOhztDCb9E1DAPnG1p69r5WLh4G6zMlTSL kBEZK+3x0nJA6z4+oFJdAJ/18y9G1oC5czXeiCU5pLm/Zm9rvfiQiQ7VL3NkC2GmydS5 821w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=wAQXanTGYyTF/grV3FrUDWlh2RmsRxPJhb2A9A/8c3g=; b=lUV58T7C5RS0sP8qvnSeTnUYxtdtO0XrpsQrhj9uRW6er+JCtTMCYpHwviG8RvdP1T 2XXKSLMGCR4wC48vbcVCKiDMysxWcfMy4juL4E1fxPmNHkBdekbM/sPOcGytYKPIRor9 QoAho257dmtcUFJYKf/Qr/1+dyLWBQBpFVvOVXq+TFmSpxVgzRAXfq73ST2yJ36OS/D7 sfsbOe/yok6OU7NUTkEYWK8+/2EWXj0P2+myvOsv+vx+xoM3NOobDE2NNs/xeOa/TsCq ti5HM9gIEjlx275q8l2MU0woV6WcVVWZA2RS0H+xxghLe3sILDg8pxHCz8nza0DFT21T levQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530DhpFNs8gQgwbLPq5jVb0AjZYsHCHraY+JTi2yGqBEcuItbmyR Jr+UUO8BLVbJT7GOrr3M6odhcfnOAni1hmoHKwg=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzZCFGI44kfZhw49pYwh3vkjYGOvUxKP9Hko9mf7jcT5nyV2UeBXPaXyJD8Swl49IFTbuG2w7R6F3xF5okNZHw=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:5251:: with SMTP id t17mr16849300edd.157.1628384773633; Sat, 07 Aug 2021 18:06:13 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <db8c1a5534e9412ebcfa37682d75f862@huawei.com> <C23D7023-B5B7-47C6-8AC5-65A98822A724@lurchi.franken.de> <CANMZLAZGawUjRhSSE_rA8AyqMx=mx1WFeJ_tZq0KVEXJd2XBfQ@mail.gmail.com> <20210807014730.GA28901@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <CAO42Z2yezZh5-B0PwCuNt2FUMAW-FjMK8QZ8uL4TsPhs26zziw@mail.gmail.com> <20210807151716.GA3098@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <CALZ3u+a_7XQ+R8mV+9KzwRwxa0riP-QD_2R69ycV0NL9jy_S3Q@mail.gmail.com> <20210807175410.GA63079@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <CALx6S36b33LD_hNFvptOJuny4g98=dhq3RtKsGeLx3ks-yYjFg@mail.gmail.com> <6F63D7FE-8768-4BD8-846E-61E50E44228F@lurchi.franken.de> <CALx6S36pbw2angEmDpu5DnX2nix9KgxFs7ExU17x+JXQFs23TA@mail.gmail.com> <CALZ3u+Yt2X3faSVW7K0eaxmaQy6iA6p4=f0c4E_F4CP0tfjHYw@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S343sL0=5wUTRSXMnhSamjTTZU=DzA9Y+dbJ4NRTu0_83w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALx6S343sL0=5wUTRSXMnhSamjTTZU=DzA9Y+dbJ4NRTu0_83w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Töma Gavrichenkov <ximaera@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2021 04:06:02 +0300
Message-ID: <CALZ3u+ad6Cecp4T+wfuKVJ4ZmnQvaCSX2njFPCN8DuctrU6uew@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: IPv6 Anycast has been killed by LINUX patch in 2016 - who cares?
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Cc: Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/blMu4Ltrydg7bwMQakA3KGKNAv0>
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: Sun, 08 Aug 2021 01:06:22 -0000

Peace,

On Sun, Aug 8, 2021 at 3:50 AM Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> wrote:
> I think
> that the same rationale could be applied that anycast should be
> unnecessary in IPv6 because there is a lot of address space to work
> with.

No, that doesn't work

> For instance, instead of defining anycast endpoints behind one
> address and hoping that the network can consistently route packets
> based on per-connection layer transport information, why not just
> embed the transport layer information in the IP address?

Because DDoS, as has been pointed out in this thread a dozen times

--
Töma

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email