Re: p2p interfaces (Re: [v6ops] How do you solve 3GPP issue if neither operator nor handset supports PD?)

otroan@employees.org Tue, 24 November 2020 14:23 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 726133A0E61 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 06:23:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 ohtMeD5fimoG for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 06:23:32 -0800 (PST)
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 3252B3A0E60 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 06:23:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from astfgl.hanazo.no (unknown [IPv6:2a01:79c:cebd:9724:e591:b8dd:48ed:9fb0]) (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 BD5BC4E11B58; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 14:23:30 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by astfgl.hanazo.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id D786F45E1222; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 15:23:28 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.20.0.2.21\))
Subject: Re: p2p interfaces (Re: [v6ops] How do you solve 3GPP issue if neither operator nor handset supports PD?)
From: otroan@employees.org
In-Reply-To: <20201124141320.GE3146465@puck.nether.net>
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 15:23:28 +0100
Cc: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-6@u-1.phicoh.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <3F0FD979-CC02-4464-99FC-17651986CB4D@employees.org>
References: <CABNhwV2-dH81CY4wSisV8BU-7H9m5a1xYMqTMecRxhNqZe=ApQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr1xV179LZ7Kxtk5mGruJcJ+BpGb2heBBy4ORtRU7bfvqw@mail.gmail.com> <CAMGpriWqnmL0qo0Hm=b+GbzcdCuXz6PM5aq8owE7-=ty5pDFsw@mail.gmail.com> <1DB65027-BEF2-4C0A-ACF4-C979DA7444C2@employees.org> <m1khXWs-00007wC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <47150D97-27D7-4AFD-8418-692D68D09828@employees.org> <m1khXol-0000MEC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <BD254B32-FAAE-4433-9CF5-2AF19275CA96@employees.org> <C9C0C278-0055-402B-A2BC-E7EE20C66483@cisco.com> <20201124141320.GE3146465@puck.nether.net>
To: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.20.0.2.21)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/gbjPDEjJRG2sGYtXKS-OsMlDpFs>
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: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 14:23:34 -0000

Jared,

>>>   To be clear. If a link-type has no L2 address / is point to point, then no implementation I've touched does ND address resolution.
>> 
>> Indeed, what would be the purpose of NA if there is no L2 address to advertise ?
>> 
> 
> 	(not 3GPP/share related but: )
> 
> 	with ND/NA on p2p ethernet it can be quite hard with some vendors
> to clear DAD when an operator or customer configures the wrong IPv6 on
> a p2p ethernet interface.  It can require bouncing the entier interface as
> vendors haven't always had a way to clear DAD without bouncing the interface.
> 
> 	If a link is point-to-point are there operations that should be
> turned off, and should we define that list?  (perhaps DAD is one of them)

If you have no shared subnet (as in draft-troan-6man-p2p-ethernet-00) and as done on the 3GPP case, there really isn't anything to DAD for.
Of course if as in the 3GPP case (and in p2p ethernet draft) the existing RA/PIO is used, there is no way to signal that fact to the other end. ;-)

Best regards,
Ole