IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] A proposal for draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-07

Timothy Winters <twinters@iol.unh.edu> Tue, 07 March 2017 19:18 UTC

Return-Path: <twinters@iol.unh.edu>
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 56AD912948D for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Mar 2017 11:18:28 -0800 (PST)
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, HTML_MESSAGE=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 (1024-bit key) header.d=iol.unh.edu
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 24HTj3T7yha9 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Mar 2017 11:18:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ua0-x234.google.com (mail-ua0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c08::234]) (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 A7BF1129426 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Mar 2017 11:18:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ua0-x234.google.com with SMTP id u30so18995108uau.0 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 07 Mar 2017 11:18:26 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iol.unh.edu; s=unh-iol; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=VoWgSIs0E+h8QrvpyRwF2yYnm/ecxhs56efUFDBEcUA=; b=Ar38rkB0tUtuOA/5hhJeMcDBeIpf3Ixu8CqET0PsGxWxwyTpE6GdWV6rwXXeZ4P/+v s92EWW1BjSMS4zbkZSDsknNwdB8pmGzSms++uAAnEf8TKiTrIfRixNDTf1UClM0G5gFv YqfG0FY32/T8ttsGqXW7u2CNucKidrqQ2MQSI=
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=VoWgSIs0E+h8QrvpyRwF2yYnm/ecxhs56efUFDBEcUA=; b=QWOwmVi4F7XE5BIHJYHM9+MwajPqqKB201B1Wfr48FCw38INY6OfGvVS459AUzPrM4 xqUKRoYp5sPyNW0j2KsvzC3L8LQ4lEw2m+zFEzx8grCnzxoS9hVWEsc+VMOfUE5iifxb eLzE9W7Cm6uno8o3wy+hQgzys8AiLccUcHCwYDuvlcIBz8ILpZ2nnC5iXYP+PTNNsg6Y yJMgmgibUmIsVj/hU7QYPx4eCjIHAsV/r8hru8PQA7GKWoX7SLH16HcH/Yk35kjwzAE9 SZrAJIdyhGOrJ4BiPJONke7H/pqyV9UlUi2WCvoCX8fJhYsYmkk5EXL9FUAg17EIk7rQ w58Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39lb9D/EhHwoo2mF63TefyWmq9eXQOf5M/d0JA8DPUv6Lkrqnmyav2QfJlsjuDcLbdhGEuxJRVQ8pLCM80QS
X-Received: by 10.237.34.125 with SMTP id o58mr2468299qtc.108.1488914305588; Tue, 07 Mar 2017 11:18:25 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.200.37.225 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Mar 2017 11:18:24 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <7FAD8D2B-B50E-44C5-AAA3-0C91621D9D54@google.com>
References: <CAN-Dau17q_BrUuzfvB1mLDt6p5UxYikphWaHpa8VQ2L-3kx-DA@mail.gmail.com> <a484b60f9d9b4fcea24dc320c550da2c@XCH15-06-11.nw.nos.boeing.com> <ee764408573b4db4b22e58c4ea5f289c@XCH15-06-11.nw.nos.boeing.com> <2c0ab33b-abbe-caf1-6147-0c583d7f5d61@gmail.com> <CAN-Dau0bSPiubeDOFeJAg6H0wP0ZNDS514eedmJtkOqHTXWOOw@mail.gmail.com> <D6D5B476-7F21-4F49-A81D-C2A11C30ADEC@google.com> <453e5b4160514907bc1bb822770e0cac@XCH15-06-11.nw.nos.boeing.com> <ABE47051-FBFC-460F-89B0-FFD451410F7B@google.com> <m1cjviu-0000EYC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <5BC57F0E-50FD-4452-853F-A08291C91EB1@google.com> <m1ck5mu-0000GaC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <5B4AFF50-8CA9-4134-8CE2-A383DB5F8BF5@google.com> <m1ckxfo-0000IMC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <225F639E-27C1-4408-BC2B-26500929049B@google.com> <CAOSSMjUR203+hYFBrFBrj9Xkjux3o7fYNd4y9kNyxwpLxF11ew@mail.gmail.com> <6D825351-7F43-4540-89AB-48DC2B5E92E3@google.com> <CAOSSMjUP6m-L1iNhE=BxHW+7hvt4YsZgxxtVn+qmgEVS9HeStA@mail.gmail.com> <3EC22050-D159-488D-A354-E46F04764E25@google.com> <CAOSSMjW_fPz3RdPyK=e-EyvyW4GawFAr3zcGLkBzDcR8Ws2MUw@mail.gmail.com> <90292C5E-013D-4B7C-B496-8A88C7285CD7@google.com> <CAOSSMjXf1ah6nrAorf+mpnOxXBpHg6difgCo4mQ6rPVZoU8CSw@mail.gmail.com> <7FAD8D2B-B50E-44C5-AAA3-0C91621D9D54@google.com>
From: Timothy Winters <twinters@iol.unh.edu>
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 14:18:24 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOSSMjX4Rq969cTuAU+sqWmW7Rh2-nxjd1vpSkeAevVZTed1HA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] A proposal for draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-07
To: james woodyatt <jhw@google.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113f1416496103054a28e0a0"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/faOMF5ZMd9bHLbnr-iSvkvp9c6c>
Cc: 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 19:18:28 -0000

Hi James,

The NOTE in 4861 states implementations can choose to process them
independently.    I'm not sure where you it allows for dropping on-link
determination if it fails.     Can you point me at the line that allows
this?

Regards,
Tim

On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 2:11 PM, james woodyatt <jhw@google.com> wrote:

> On Mar 7, 2017, at 11:05, Timothy Winters <twinters@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
>
>
> Last Paragraph of Section 6.3.4
>
> "  Similarly,[ADDRCONF] may impose certain restrictions on the prefix
> length for
>    address configuration purposes.  Therefore, the prefix might be
>    rejected by [ADDRCONF] implementation in the host.  However, the
>    prefix length is still valid for on-link determination when combined
>    with other flags in the prefix option."
>
> It allows for rejection in ADDRCONF as LwIP does, but requires on-link
> determination.
>
>
> Respectfully, my concern is that the Note, which immediately follows that
> excerpt (see my previous message), provides sufficient clarification that
> on-link determination is not REQUIRED to proceed if Prefix Length is
> invalid for address configuration purposes in a host that implements RFC
> 4862. It is merely OPTIONAL.
>
>
> --james woodyatt <jhw@google.com>
>
>
>
>


-- 

Now offering testing for SDN applications and controllers in our SDN switch
test bed. Learn more today http://bit.ly/SDN_IOLPR

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email