IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> Thu, 09 May 2019 19:11 UTC

Return-Path: <sander@steffann.nl>
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 980F8120131 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 May 2019 12:11:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.301
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.301 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_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=steffann.nl
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 OBlMPWpLQFDn for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 May 2019 12:11:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sintact.nl (mail.sintact.nl [83.247.10.6]) (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 B1D10120110 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 May 2019 12:11:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3A0F4A; Thu, 9 May 2019 21:11:05 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=steffann.nl; h= x-mailer:references:in-reply-to:date:date:subject:subject :mime-version:content-type:content-type:message-id:from:from :received:received; s=mail; t=1557429063; bh=QPM8KFZFHKNakan9jTU z2lj4Q3qQYYPoJ53Tga+VwxY=; b=pWBGFnwW5KOBuIYgw4s+Xm04X/KoanMfLTI Yll8W539mIh25XREl5zv2iU2v0sHrp/ymJeIVIxcCSauasO0A4zCQ4SpXhuFcIsB m3EutOXxl4Y36qJlRI1JYlxBmGH4niB3njRO9+eFI0+0wEAq9HVtfWGr9nRpWVrP 08wCCiiw=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.sintact.nl
Received: from mail.sintact.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.sintact.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id RDn_o-qkRCHK; Thu, 9 May 2019 21:11:03 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [IPv6:2a02:a213:a300:ce80:f981:163a:9486:3d5c] (unknown [IPv6:2a02:a213:a300:ce80:f981:163a:9486:3d5c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9750649; Thu, 9 May 2019 21:11:03 +0200 (CEST)
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
From: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
Message-Id: <96E69473-7B83-4393-ABC7-A11BE81A6AD8@steffann.nl>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_210D3E38-63F4-4B42-926E-E8D2F161947F"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha256"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.8\))
Subject: Re: Confirmation to advance: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6only-flag-05
Date: Thu, 09 May 2019 21:11:02 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CAN-Dau21yEap8P8TcXfTPPyFH6W9bJ7bWh6xZN-Guqba1_im4g@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>, Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>
To: David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu>
References: <F8BFFCAD-E58E-4736-8A1C-56579B6F6032@employees.org> <a2465e81-a17f-ab48-efda-20fe12a70077@foobar.org> <30239E0C-C444-4A7E-8342-AEE47BF8A2BB@employees.org> <8b9fd743-bfcc-525c-98f6-154f3fa713cc@foobar.org> <CAO42Z2zEWvt9NyemMb8H0AEvPvmNSDGa4wcXiS6n5yRxNFCHQg@mail.gmail.com> <c7e18765-be04-6494-8193-984dbccb520b@foobar.org> <CANMZLAYh+V57yrWOzmUyjSMK0g95u1D5_GZmyZBMOMKAZnrnCg@mail.gmail.com> <3F474511-6FE3-4A0A-9B84-7C37F08FBB5D@steffann.nl> <E352C226-C708-4418-BCDE-10525CAB109A@jisc.ac.uk> <652fb10e-b8ce-0151-a9a0-62d2378caed2@gmail.com> <0079c716-d56c-7199-f493-f5e56e1307ae@foobar.org> <b33de303-eaca-f7f6-804e-2c9343eb92a1@gmail.com> <6C4ABEF1-2565-4BA9-9FC5-5B3C45A719AD@gmail.com> <c2222416-6491-1906-a403-d012777a4b38@gmail.com> <CABNhwV0-SdKZqQa4z9jhpc8h1Eq=8UxRhtvHt1==BYEMTVRjug@mail.gmail.com> <96790121-7D50-4C6F-924F-87065B989E44@gmail.com> <ccab3694-54f2-bdd1-f8ac-cb159dbc0a81@gont.com.ar> <CAN-Dau0_w0n9C6grqi1bXAL-k239K7RMiQyhx5=c-Y_wqrV2OQ@mail.gmail.com> <20191d2e-32f3-a8e9-e3be-e67b326e3061@gmail.com> <CAN-Dau21yEap8P8TcXfTPPyFH6W9bJ7bWh6xZN-Guqba1_im4g@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.8)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/jp2P295rU4hGtmJihLjSNgp-jjw>
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, 09 May 2019 19:11:13 -0000

Hi David,

> Because with this flag now only being a secondary signal and the lack of any DHCPOFFERS is now the primary signal, it is safe to allow any RA set to 1 to trigger no longer auto-configuring an IPv4 Link-Local address, this only has an effect if the host also doesn't receive any DHCPOFFERS.

Making the lack of DHCPOFFERS the primary signal and this flag a secondary signal would take away my strongest objections. I still wonder whether it is worth the effort and the added learning curve and complexity, and whether other heuristics (see Philip Homburg's message for example) aren't as good/good enough. At least the debugging effort for help desks won't be harmed anymore by the flag, because as long as DHCPOFFERS are working the flag doesn't hurt, and solving problems when DHCPOFFERS aren't working is already part of their current procedures.

Cheers,
Sander

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email