IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [v6ops] How do you solve 3GPP issue if neither operator nor handset supports PD?

Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org> Wed, 25 November 2020 12:12 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 510393A0FF5 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 04:12:09 -0800 (PST)
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 jkhhINepnNNY for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 04:12:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from clarinet.employees.org (clarinet.employees.org [198.137.202.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB1053A0FF3 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 04:12:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2a02:2121:307:d18a:8dd4:163a:5f89:746d] (unknown [IPv6:2a02:2121:307:d18a:8dd4:163a:5f89:746d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by clarinet.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 894424E11B87; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:12:06 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [v6ops] How do you solve 3GPP issue if neither operator nor handset supports PD?
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 13:12:03 +0100
Message-Id: <FB1D5D5F-3E79-4C9F-BFED-3ED8522FAE1F@employees.org>
References: <m1khtaY-0000JoC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
Cc: ipv6@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <m1khtaY-0000JoC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
To: Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-7@u-1.phicoh.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (18B92)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/g3fX6I5Dsoo4Jq-sVVmv3WGE5Gw>
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, 25 Nov 2020 12:12:09 -0000


> On 25 Nov 2020, at 13:08, Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-7@u-1.phicoh.com> wrote:
> 
>> Philip, obviously I do
>> not agree to your position and ask that you have a further
>> consideration of the "LLA Type" draft. IPv6 interfaces may assign
>> multiple IPv6 addresses, and even multiple IPv6 link-local address
>> which may be created by multiple means (e.g., RFC4941(bis), RFC7217,
>> RFC3972, admin config, OMNI etc.).  By placing a "Type" code in
>> bits 56-63 of the LLA the different types can be differentiated
>> without there being a chance for mutual interference or collisions
>> that might require DAD. 
> 
> That doesn't make any sense to me. Outside OMNI, this type of interference
> just doesn't exist.

Indeed. And just do like ipv6cp and negotiate the iid at l2 if that’s needed. 

Cheers 
Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email