Re: Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host)

Erik Kline <ek@google.com> Thu, 09 November 2017 03:03 UTC

Return-Path: <ek@google.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 C6B54120713 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Nov 2017 19:03:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 Tn7rhkgInbmR for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Nov 2017 19:03:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yw0-x229.google.com (mail-yw0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::229]) (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 2159E129ADF for <6man@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Nov 2017 19:03:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yw0-x229.google.com with SMTP id k11so4165506ywh.1 for <6man@ietf.org>; Wed, 08 Nov 2017 19:03:08 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=useyj2CvFFl8IGlZeA5IB7KegqoYokkv2mJT9H6CNJM=; b=JRsSkgeZeOaBytDGyWdzFx8r1ErVZ0/IsMzHvbcAzG/r3mPje8Ex1vSJmI4crk4An2 m6PgLhxyfk5c2IJZaXJ9bLem51ThXxnOGhlJeqMdG5U201lsQwYhVuMN8XAxDafVQc99 YvaIvHMzypuA6u4+RgdDtlYVmDiAgqc6daaVOpvlUl0BWyI4tiji9wxlFdiT7bJ4t/zs 6XByyuPzyi2c8XL0+IcAs2hjwjE4Trlm4rLTZsRDklQrqJz2vNPjV2K81jaHyepw9cPA 7vgupmV4q8ndhXz4G/iiIXBhqdJ9JCOWspIYIkYu4og38ohKhH+eg4y0W2kSYH+Z+vZc eUBQ==
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=useyj2CvFFl8IGlZeA5IB7KegqoYokkv2mJT9H6CNJM=; b=qK05pR+80mZ/7Czx7Rd66LsMASzqh12PR+rw1m4sLWFRidL/eqW/kXFrh2Kj5Vlq0W y1hRUxuYOA0nZouLuhM5JhO0gCZ6jyQpnXx+4Esm0t/dq3DFHGC8TKza1SUSQuhAckKe tLJfFwjGtC1leK1GXDIoOsNOXonBdmZNUZznfPFIZJBddhfrz96Yo1jWQRqMKMnL9dqC Hoindno3IX/5TqsKASoQIAM9aC75vkM+Rb8/KVEi2bKMPcCHrJInqIZp67+4g1b9sWKI X1RrSheGvFTi9hb6G83o2dacKyt4brWDxGGg/jvqWh3ha5MQft0Rce9eYqPL04NhK4KE Qz1w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX6StZ+Q36Ok6+/MSa7KvnX98SwiJj4lBpQN8XgaQmZayg+J7ldj 8Zm5/evgzUZU7BQUHWviwBdW+QOpMShBgT4PWWrD+g==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+RoWRRchLZY7WtN+hnjynx2Q0EtrSkXUp08zdCyu2HosNasrdSGEgzynq0YExnCJmKtJF7AIZMMM0oJU/jb+qg=
X-Received: by 10.129.89.133 with SMTP id n127mr1824307ywb.68.1510196587031; Wed, 08 Nov 2017 19:03:07 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.37.130.80 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Nov 2017 19:02:46 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <be9724f5-2ff5-d90c-2749-ecae2c628b78@si6networks.com>
References: <be9724f5-2ff5-d90c-2749-ecae2c628b78@si6networks.com>
From: Erik Kline <ek@google.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2017 12:02:46 +0900
Message-ID: <CAAedzxpLL26kDi1yzB=rDQjuNOpb64wtCBMcP+VYf=dc54rF7w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host)
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Cc: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>, "6man-ads@tools.ietf.org" <6man-ads@ietf.org>, "v6ops-ads@ietf.org" <v6ops-ads@ietf.org>, "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host@tools.ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256; boundary="001a1149152c250c80055d840b41"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/jldYtKPEjRdRImdd_RskheU_AnI>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 09 Nov 2017 03:03:12 -0000

I don't think we should be recommending unique RAs per device where
the devices are all on a shared link.

My understanding was that in the original motivating wifi deployment
every node is effectively isolated in its own (pseudo)VLAN, and
node-to-node traffic must be routed through the infrastructure (to the
extent such a thing can actually be enforced in a medium like wifi).