IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Deprecating IPv6 (Re: draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6-00)

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Sat, 03 June 2017 20:43 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@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 1EA65129B5E; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 13:43:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 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] 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 5R5wPl4uTS6z; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 13:43:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf0-x22d.google.com (mail-pf0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22d]) (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 965891286B1; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 13:43:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id n23so66040185pfb.2; Sat, 03 Jun 2017 13:43:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=6H1/Loyvz3nSfE/NFr5x492Qngzeurt/c3IjhNAyHrQ=; b=ed+R1nAeyg1Z/d7zcnv9bQIxqFEZ/lpwUPWXrI6v36afJ634R4/WiQMpuDZkpbV6Zn 2X/Pw323o4Kc0iKe4IONhrkm0m2zQr7fldY2H31Ve5vDuksH1BmVi/N3Oa0AjapcGEXP RGs32OyqV97FboKQRcV3pPqwwu2TkUR2sONnzqBdX2sSjJmwFJX6vzZF89OAQkv5n/VU A1t0Kv564EiK9Dht03uvZEHGfiEGhwYsZm3Jw0U2wtX3z4BaSpJTi6Uj/wwItX9kNF0P tQkqh6fl/vciBamS9QreQRvjx4dDEkfKoraFzMU9HCIsZuSjXSEcZO+xcTmmGCRAOJi2 uMvw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6H1/Loyvz3nSfE/NFr5x492Qngzeurt/c3IjhNAyHrQ=; b=V4Wz8m7ZW1uAHMagYqiUeg+iAl2ao9sjv2s1EsSRvnKzbViDzm1neGqqHAZbYEtMC/ utJriUkiYaFQqytEXvSa5IZRE1p1eXBUPwkScj8TN/1960m7tpxEVbcxGBNhYqDs8oC+ XCysSGdwbuBwJDZ2SySTIa2HHAApRm8BylYS4hvjbbQjxhvTQpWEEYBrOYw7Hpik8u7e pqVZYOPbvoQA3DJTQnjqRagEaX4nb/meFmFD0IIvB40EGnUc6XT2zGY07yWSlIMEux1S hvWx9mDfKD5e+MrGBdnGwbxBEsHXluxi1Y/my6FlTlzBd8zjxqk89Zr4fjjeDGBOfaaE Aqdg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcDSAkZaKQWhNf4fl/MOO3lN6rfSEjOqoVPTE07yOAjJkPpHOzNk 9TMUbTOIGoVvlCzm
X-Received: by 10.99.7.138 with SMTP id 132mr13466497pgh.171.1496522617966; Sat, 03 Jun 2017 13:43:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.21] (96.23.255.123.dynamic.snap.net.nz. [123.255.23.96]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v3sm17922492pgn.56.2017.06.03.13.43.35 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 03 Jun 2017 13:43:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Deprecating IPv6 (Re: draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6-00)
To: 6man <ipv6@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6@ietf.org
References: <CAO42Z2wp72j-yOsR8C=iqS+dX14wLwthAtOTvD5ugj_NQ=NQag@mail.gmail.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <8be34ef8-557f-652e-0d2f-f1a1e008bffd@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2017 08:43:31 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAO42Z2wp72j-yOsR8C=iqS+dX14wLwthAtOTvD5ugj_NQ=NQag@mail.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/eL0Gr8ryaxz8ObzfNa0v8D6s6lw>
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 20:43:40 -0000

On 03/06/2017 15:23, Mark Smith wrote:
...
> If this proposal is accepted, then I think /120s will become the
> defacto subnet size, despite what the draft says about /64s being the
> recommended default. 

Predicting the future of complex systems is hard, but I think this
prediction is wrong. There are some very strong arguments against
prefixes that long, and it is the IPv6-over-foo specs that prevent
such long prefixes being used.

The IPv6 routing architecture has always been CIDRised. Please
remember that "ID" in CIDR stands for "inter-domain". So there
is nothing new there; even BCP198 was nothing new.

IMNSHO we made a basic mistake by including the value of n in the addressing
architecture.

That's the n in
>    |          n bits               |           128-n bits            |
>    +-------------------------------+---------------------------------+
>    |       subnet prefix           |           interface ID          |
>    +-------------------------------+---------------------------------+

All this draft really does is observe that n is a parameter. It could
be said in many fewer words, I suppose.

If we'd been able to agree on simply removing n=64 from 4291bis,
I wouldn't have put my name on this draft.

    Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email