IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Confirmation to advance: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6only-flag-05

Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> Wed, 08 May 2019 21:35 UTC

Return-Path: <bob.hinden@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 673B912014F for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 May 2019 14:35:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 CKlCZpQnJVUB for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 May 2019 14:35:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm1-x32c.google.com (mail-wm1-x32c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32c]) (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 619721200FB for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 May 2019 14:35:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm1-x32c.google.com with SMTP id h11so405055wmb.5 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 08 May 2019 14:35:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=Uez6tgDAUR6lVE+FGPcapisXIsp7Zb904/rbNKxWJX4=; b=aYrJ0lLcMicjhzrT7dUZAzM8Hm1XbyTlq2fbmVVROdu6+SfSTFq9uVOFOKbscQQip0 yTvd5dPWq5KdwaNMmvgPHarQGbJLN0+EBSE78okhEA/QthLm6++G+OJ75foGHAkiFSS8 Gk7el46h8WwvV5RVLsCIMXFKXvHg5Ttklw1GTSwWCTR00Goa9hOrw/ZDZwyqON0eMeQ3 iN9pTaK0oaKZzRR7YOMbQ6z37HRkjwhPSqX+Vxyoh5g4yJChvCuuK8iPRpdtdWwqW09R MKblzIiaj+ttCttluAWlepSrqoKeHF3jQ6tbO59TNv43rkIrR94e2qYNHvD7o5DKL/Xy NfBQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=Uez6tgDAUR6lVE+FGPcapisXIsp7Zb904/rbNKxWJX4=; b=BODn/GyqAnwG1YsjILhRm8VusE35RqEhILxCOCelu+d7Pj79ACBlBUspYy8KKTq9ty RyVM5d4pfp6OaSS++NhylcjEw+9ij8CQZ/zec5BLTduES2xOWp6+trsb4f0qn6NJznIq GB/nOlXCW4XvZJ+5aw/diFZvhTKMgQEMorg6TnJvfhrHlogf6TCiNFaTeqJRKga7s8HJ 9U0nVLXUjmF+ljTEbgY9CRlk2XzItobXqrLVzt7PeYF1Z/23+PT9LIcTft6upCveGu6J JEvAoV9fqOfOZDnyXKc2STgpmzzOBH3b79F7aYPxH09MM78ZR2EyKjkvXFrEeTI12waQ njKA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWoUfTpzN5ELgpBOm35s1Ei1d+Iq9zrw83GU7oEfMtAS6Qh8HHO Fz1mmxaJ/PevcsO6ErJU8BU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyKRp2hhRJwqI3N2bYfUEjKkXQZLa8waGXRH6QeD+laTCAMpGMjcWJgtwFRT1WrzR7zUcSdxQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:388:: with SMTP id w8mr254581wmd.3.1557351299900; Wed, 08 May 2019 14:34:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:647:5a00:ef0b:d9b5:e07d:1b22:522f? ([2601:647:5a00:ef0b:d9b5:e07d:1b22:522f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 10sm166798wmn.4.2019.05.08.14.34.57 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 08 May 2019 14:34:58 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.8\))
Subject: Re: Confirmation to advance: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6only-flag-05
From: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <ccab3694-54f2-bdd1-f8ac-cb159dbc0a81@gont.com.ar>
Date: Wed, 08 May 2019 14:34:48 -0700
Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>, IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <16EB66E4-8F36-4386-B13C-3E39700B4F2D@gmail.com>
References: <F8BFFCAD-E58E-4736-8A1C-56579B6F6032@employees.org> <a2465e81-a17f-ab48-efda-20fe12a70077@foobar.org> <30239E0C-C444-4A7E-8342-AEE47BF8A2BB@employees.org> <8b9fd743-bfcc-525c-98f6-154f3fa713cc@foobar.org> <CAO42Z2zEWvt9NyemMb8H0AEvPvmNSDGa4wcXiS6n5yRxNFCHQg@mail.gmail.com> <c7e18765-be04-6494-8193-984dbccb520b@foobar.org> <CANMZLAYh+V57yrWOzmUyjSMK0g95u1D5_GZmyZBMOMKAZnrnCg@mail.gmail.com> <3F474511-6FE3-4A0A-9B84-7C37F08FBB5D@steffann.nl> <E352C226-C708-4418-BCDE-10525CAB109A@jisc.ac.uk> <652fb10e-b8ce-0151-a9a0-62d2378caed2@gmail.com> <0079c716-d56c-7199-f493-f5e56e1307ae@foobar.org> <b33de303-eaca-f7f6-804e-2c9343eb92a1@gmail.com> <6C4ABEF1-2565-4BA9-9FC5-5B3C45A719AD@gmail.com> <c2222416-6491-1906-a403-d012777a4b38@gmail.com> <CABNhwV0-SdKZqQa4z9jhpc8h1Eq=8UxRhtvHt1==BYEMTVRjug@mail.gmail.com> <96790121-7D50-4C6F-924F-87065B989E44@gmail.com> <ccab3694-54f2-bdd1-f8ac-cb159dbc0a81@gont.com.ar>
To: Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.8)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/boNw0CtjSsYBcy3Bmuba8-SbSGs>
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: Wed, 08 May 2019 21:35:03 -0000

Fernando,

> On May 4, 2019, at 5:58 AM, Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar> wrote:
> 
> On 4/5/19 01:53, Bob Hinden wrote:
>> Gyan,
>> 
>>> On May 3, 2019, at 3:53 PM, Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Do we or anyone in the WG know of any enterprise that is thinking of going IPv6 only.  I don't.  
>> 
>> Yes, Microsoft.   It was stated in 6man several meetings ago that they were planning IPv6 Only and that this was a mechanism that would be a useful tool.
> 
> The question is probably why not use IPv4 to disable IPv4. Entangling
> one protocol with another generally leads to increased complexity, and
> interesting attack vectors.

As it says in the Introduction in the draft:

   Because there is no IPv4 support on an IPv6-Only link, the only way
   to notify the dual stack hosts that this link is IPv6-Only is to use
   an IPv6 mechanism.  

If there is no IPv4 on the link, you can’t use an IPv4 mechanisms to turn off IPv4.

You have read the draft, right?

Bob



> 
> I wonder why, if the issue is really a layer 2- one (e.g., stations
> being awaken unnecessarily), the problem is not solved at layer 2- --
> e.g. filtering at layer to, based on the Ether Proto.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Thanks,
> -- 
> Fernando Gont
> e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@si6networks.com
> PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
> 
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email