IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> Sat, 03 June 2017 15:50 UTC

Return-Path: <tom@herbertland.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 317F0129535 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 08:50:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 JKXQ6fzUrB9B for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 08:50:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x22e.google.com (mail-wm0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22e]) (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 A6D22129504 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 08:50:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id n195so46757524wmg.1 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 03 Jun 2017 08:50:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=C///FMPXf/m8bIGh3SPum/8dijp5c0CPzGQ0pd9X9h4=; b=QK64+dCEN6z8PI9nmR5QDBeh6jspFWIi+7baqW8Yys9Yl7GsNj1NNFIPROOrdy5GiI e2Iigws7OGgACV0h07q8DeHms8Htq318bvzuIwq0UuUMThyKT9Mkv4LHHVVGy9KIi5FM 2MwEErrBcYiRGY1eQE9HIum3aoxzt4jO6Xa7H9eocTyNggsBihwfF+18j6TS5gIgYnll OvW21Unx/CVMNY2FIM6rmeRZSxEMDkB+s4xj7t9vYlLPoJPfF4uJlFbB3aSro8bNyW3m fVuDLq6/nPi4SXPLu95aOoXwQni2wF/O13cpAvQYntGuWwo7aNO2w+9Tw/FNG0cc03+N +BSQ==
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:cc; bh=C///FMPXf/m8bIGh3SPum/8dijp5c0CPzGQ0pd9X9h4=; b=VeLEje94uQ6dEwWFuG+s5EfT9VU+7LzPB1VU3Wy1XrKUUn0COY8c3fpA/tWcr8l5EA TRh62D8DiWd766INQSkzKCH7u2TFHGmK4hLGoRMJhN+eqLrmVVM6KwV94NSoOzF5nTwz qnyivBVryGXr5o7ZkRnnksvpDDbPN3tYlFAar1LXZFNYJ6rhSeK0g/zrxW432EpD0URk j04fpqjx6tIgmDHNZaD0zzeJNpg2/czVOVIIaGEmL8Mh4bI2M+LST6VnI0NA3x+LiAW+ fs24xEM9HXk3P+fL9FNBf4lVbV7+6eSorc72L/SUSlguzNNDf1L6gm2SDAnBVJ/qJJzq fffQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcDpOV178rST1KrEZJEYDXlLrLxjv1hXkCYLBTfOahpHt6rfpXtU YhaOnycfvnEyu4F1wwYGBOGTSgnVKClW
X-Received: by 10.28.56.198 with SMTP id f189mr2648258wma.111.1496504999217; Sat, 03 Jun 2017 08:49:59 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.132.135 with HTTP; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 08:49:58 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr2T4Xu3_CCrCPoHSDC6L+U0HB9vNvXA0n2UPDxjiu0Vgg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20170602141112.x64nleqclygz7dwd@Vurt.local> <20170602141259.GD30896@gir.theapt.org> <CAKD1Yr0DtQYvCYLQexhXe_nhb5rjeyhnB4bCveqyO5Xbuwdg1A@mail.gmail.com> <20170602145655.msfjw35qhoev4sm2@Vurt.local> <CAKD1Yr3gqFgq3dxFaBEV++q5cgx1AHzFLGRJ50DYJjVE69C7iA@mail.gmail.com> <f2260ee557014429a1fef32de040547b@XCH15-06-11.nw.nos.boeing.com> <d62ce5e3ea0f486eb4c9d54609a86b24@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com> <04bdfdfe018145e6aedbaa62ed6cbfb0@XCH15-06-11.nw.nos.boeing.com> <78fe298cb5484d50a56cf6ed4ddafb54@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com> <6bba4c2b58964787860f2c7acf130959@XCH15-06-11.nw.nos.boeing.com> <d3558856-6faf-1d50-870a-c9db1e91e34c@innovationslab.net> <20170603003552.7A0327ADD848@rock.dv.isc.org> <67a85067-2150-62cf-0eab-bca3d7827a4c@si6networks.com> <CAKD1Yr1VMES3cdm6pWrgvoX5YxhwfEwQa+f=RSnsRsY95eC4kw@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr3cXwM+2TBnuq9rnVHKgR6QY9naXVqzxQV4Hw9uB8926g@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr3oSQfM+gPJzfpK3sagb456dWvC6ab7t4D=FnFuahHqLg@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr0tGNvAZX1+UsSNdiuXQjtZo_iTmskzN1BCZKT9_UYm1A@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr1ub3XRTJf_d+rzUYDkvb=-R75JdZBRgUVTZxfCmH5XCQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S35Ye67CHmqDF0AW5SX_-P6p16A1i6pFp5nOUwRB-r_GPA@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr2T4Xu3_CCrCPoHSDC6L+U0HB9vNvXA0n2UPDxjiu0Vgg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2017 08:49:58 -0700
Message-ID: <CALx6S36SfkvmPpeOfrXLYUhjRusjOiimh8u1c-gtQ=wat2=u5g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6-00
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Cc: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>, IETF IPv6 Mailing List <ipv6@ietf.org>, Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/dd1U74tg0Vb_W9LgBOO219hSOQY>
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: Sat, 03 Jun 2017 15:50:02 -0000

On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 10:17 PM, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> wrote:
> On Jun 3, 2017 13:51, "Tom Herbert" <tom@herbertland.com> wrote:
>
> Which allows the phone to bridge 2^64 devices! I don't understand why
> my phone needs a /64.
>
>
> The answers are in RFC 7934 and RFC7421.

Lorenzo,

RFC7934 presents the arguments why hosts need multiple addresses, not
why hosts need 2^64 addresses. For RFC7421 the arguments seem to be
around operational simplicity. These don't answer my specific
question: Why does a low end device, like a phone, _need_ the
equivalent of four billion IPv4 address spaces assigned to it? What is
a specific application that a phone runs that justifies giving the
device such an enormous space? I don't believe it can be ILA, ILNP,
NAT, or renumbering-- these are justifications for given datacenter
servers /64s.

Tom

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email