Re: [atn] [EXTERNAL] Re: Embedding IP information in an IPv6 address (OMNI)

otroan@employees.org Thu, 15 October 2020 17:18 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
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 5944B3A0A53; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 10:18:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 8KlVt12prwDx; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 10:18:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from clarinet.employees.org (clarinet.employees.org [IPv6:2607:7c80:54:3::74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D08633A09E7; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 10:18:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from astfgl.hanazo.no (unknown [IPv6:2a01:79c:cebd:9724:1cc2:f9c6:38ec:acb4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by clarinet.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2B1234E11CCC; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 17:18:11 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by astfgl.hanazo.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4E2440B9652; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:18:07 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\))
Subject: Re: [atn] [EXTERNAL] Re: Embedding IP information in an IPv6 address (OMNI)
From: otroan@employees.org
In-Reply-To: <5dc9abd1d1484682ad8773db76f71d00@boeing.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:18:07 +0200
Cc: Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-6@u-1.phicoh.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, "atn@ietf.org" <atn@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <9D28E43D-6418-4CB7-9C44-F67E8D2A222F@employees.org>
References: <c068f71229404b3693b977ca7cde828f@boeing.com> <739bc23a-c48d-4791-be06-4f972b4699d8@si6networks.com> <5ae440c047db4b51811a00fd5dd15e3a@boeing.com> <m1kSzvJ-0000AXC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <d0ba7529d30d4a4bb839b1077d52ee9e@boeing.com> <m1kT6Lw-0000HIC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <5dc9abd1d1484682ad8773db76f71d00@boeing.com>
To: "Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/eOOhCC4LSH7vuCtgDSbccLDlDG8>
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: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 17:18:13 -0000

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: atn [mailto:atn-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Philip Homburg
>> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 9:44 AM
>> To: ipv6@ietf.org
>> Cc: Templin (US), Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>om>; atn@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [atn] [EXTERNAL] Re: Embedding IP information in an IPv6 address (OMNI)
>> 
>>> Thanks for having a look at OMNI; let me know if there are any questions.
>> 
>> I'll try to spend more time reading the draft.
> 
> OK, thanks.
> 
>>> That is the way we had it in older draft versions, but have more recently
>>> changed to using all of the bits 10 thru 128. The thing that inspired the
>>> change was the realization that (not now, but in the not too distant
>>> future) every air, ground, sea and space vehicle on the planet may
>>> need to use OMNI - pedestrians, too. And, at some point, we may find
>>> the /64 limit too restricting.
>> 
>> As long as we are talking about physical devices, I'm not sure how we
>> are going to run out of /64s.
> 
> This is a very important point - it is not just about physical devices but also about
> the arbitrarily complex virtual networks they may have on-board. In the future,
> even my cellphone could have a deeply-nested virtual IPv6 network-of-networks
> requiring subnetting and multi-addressing - its turtles all the way down.
> 
>> Even if that would happen, there are probably lessons learned for an OMNIv2
> 
> I'd rather get it right the first time.

If I were you I would take a look at what it would take to change the solution to use explicit signalling instead of implicit through semantic addressing.
Explicit signalling would not have any of these type of limitations either.

Cheers,
Ole