Re: Confirmation to advance: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6only-flag-05

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

Sander,
On 28-May-19 11:04, Sander Steffann wrote:
> Hi David,
> 
> This is starting to feel like a personal attack...

I hope not. Really. You happen to be presenting a certain
point of view, that's all.

> 
>> Then stop telling people to filter Ethertype 0x0800 because you can't use RFC2563 in the presence of such filters.
> 
> Those are different options, depending on your situation.

Well, yes. But if an operator chooses to filter 0x0800 and wishes to actively
inform hosts that IPv4 is unavailable, only an IPv6 mechanism can do so.
So here we are.

   Brian

> 
>> Further, there really aren't IPv4 clients and separate IPv6 clients anymore, just about everything that matters is dual-stack.
> 
> Of course.
> 
>> So you are really saying, tell dual-stack clients to not use IPv4 using IPv4. So who is the purist? You're saying you can't block IPv4 because you have to use IPv4 to tell dual-stack clients they shouldn't use IPv4, now that's a catch 22.
> 
> Block the ethertype if you don't want any traffic, use the DHCP option if you want to explicitly inform clients, I don't care. There are plenty of options.
> 
>> Again this is a real problem is some at least a few situations, and they are fairly common situations, just not in the home broadband world at least today.
> 
> And there are solutions already available. Just pick one instead of inventing a new one...
> 
> Cheers,
> Sander
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> [e-mail]
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> .
>