IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: RFC4941bis implementations

"Manfredi (US), Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com> Thu, 02 April 2020 21:19 UTC

Return-Path: <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com>
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 6BE253A1A06 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 14:19:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=boeing.com
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 a-8Q0CRlYuXt for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 14:19:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from clt-mbsout-02.mbs.boeing.net (clt-mbsout-02.mbs.boeing.net [130.76.144.163]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B34B83A1A05 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 14:19:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by clt-mbsout-02.mbs.boeing.net (8.15.2/8.15.2/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id 032LJ80U020188; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 17:19:09 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=boeing.com; s=boeing-s1912; t=1585862349; bh=0qFgiUWaNMT5EUAfqn8wgessDQB+4yYseQrpkP7bvlk=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=K1vDVWbUZKXrkji0NvgVY9G6NCR30wLcY7TJxUfTa8rnd6em9ezEE2muDlFFkoyCe 73Mb3GZhKv7I9k65YjcFZF2uMgXyvxshdI/K0rn7ahLwJUzehGPChvDDHL5zPra7Q1 nOp2XkBAKFo4LPIBC/g8jmd20k19zIcY/NV/Byixyk3QszRXwdsog4c4cgRCLLsysL ZjRA18ZwDgVKUBDGxxgqxp6FxVkumO60KhCUhwXV8Yr0WxXy0/imKxj1bq/23G0Zbq A/eQ+PTjGMXLoAZwuI/WOzGMRCMoMGi7CEeAXwCR86wlgNFdn5dtK3JQBeR4fV+8bZ 0YQmZxV7sKP4g==
Received: from XCH16-01-10.nos.boeing.com (xch16-01-10.nos.boeing.com [144.115.66.5]) by clt-mbsout-02.mbs.boeing.net (8.15.2/8.15.2/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTPS id 032LJ8fq020183 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 2 Apr 2020 17:19:08 -0400
Received: from XCH16-01-11.nos.boeing.com (144.115.66.39) by XCH16-01-10.nos.boeing.com (144.115.66.5) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.1.1913.5; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 14:19:07 -0700
Received: from XCH16-01-11.nos.boeing.com ([fe80::c57c:39bc:4c0a:384b]) by XCH16-01-11.nos.boeing.com ([fe80::c57c:39bc:4c0a:384b%4]) with mapi id 15.01.1913.005; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 14:19:07 -0700
From: "Manfredi (US), Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com>
To: Florian Obser <florian@openbsd.org>
CC: "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: RFC4941bis implementations
Thread-Topic: RFC4941bis implementations
Thread-Index: AQHWCRQc8w4kmIeimkeJsZM5BrSSkahmp6QAgAARYwD//5wMMA==
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2020 21:19:07 +0000
Message-ID: <3a66d2ed2a4049ae83ba2f3ed6c86d30@boeing.com>
References: <7d65f86a-7a82-6139-b455-a27046496c52@si6networks.com> <af621915-ad9d-eb89-01d7-6ec7c5dfdd5e@gmail.com> <20200402201140.4ohxhod3oa7fah3i@imap.narrans.de>
In-Reply-To: <20200402201140.4ohxhod3oa7fah3i@imap.narrans.de>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [144.115.204.6]
x-tm-snts-smtp: 7E32721B08C59531D85E1D8D24DD74E7688537FF6AC091211C692AD6ACBA3E482000:8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/jc8cYgLAqEFZTdRloRQpYa7nrx8>
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, 02 Apr 2020 21:19:14 -0000

-----Original Message-----
From: ipv6 <ipv6-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Florian Obser

> I'm happy to report that slaacd(8) in OpenBSD does not care about the plen.
It just forms a 128 bit random number and overwrites the front with
the prefix.[1]
So if you put your whole /29 onlink you can have 99 bits of entropy!

Yay! And if it works for any length of prefix, it also works for 64-bit prefixen.

Also want to point out, especially for devices that are assigned a prefix of their own, any argument anyone insists on, for why a long IID is better for security, would result in a shorter prefix. So the security considerations are moot. Is that 72-bit IID wonderful? What about the consequent 56-bit prefix?

But okay, this might be out of scope with today's SLAAC. I continue to thik that implement SLAAC with any old IID length is just as easy as not doing so.

Bert

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email