Re: draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum-01

Erik Kline <ek@loon.co> Sun, 24 March 2019 20:47 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 DB08D120071 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Mar 2019 13:47:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=loon.co
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 Azi8PG5qvjRp for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Mar 2019 13:47:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it1-x136.google.com (mail-it1-x136.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::136]) (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 2498F12006B for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Mar 2019 13:47:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it1-x136.google.com with SMTP id w15so11087667itc.0 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Mar 2019 13:47:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=loon.co; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:reply-to:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=m5Y0bUKauHhR6crqo+T5oHvVOZqT0nTsL/U38YfjiZ8=; b=eDs32QpAp5id0zWEgrqX+h4Z3mW32QPUOwMU9gGe7e4D8vmEt7J6Dm4TKu6NZTvx1M TXrNGovNJTGdJNXB0HZdj/XQyTUAvt6oTCu++vjhs+X8DfLRm1tV/sb+40heRTEa5nm4 PuP3x/YroJ05wI6oC2DgCg8OfAEVG8K/iJuFo=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:reply-to :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=m5Y0bUKauHhR6crqo+T5oHvVOZqT0nTsL/U38YfjiZ8=; b=JMVR56WEsPFZIJfi4WLMY2w1qHt+NdstFF2h20/ZygniZzChZPzu8BWA5RbigEdYRK sOJGcG2uS3yzNQELRMJ/btnpab2LN5gonfmeY96w4KQXU5cUyVNBYMsuAC63pNgbaHuD zw145vn4M8BQedkakMjVrpvCCUrVqQiemorG4/lWWW7rcJ2/74XejEHEEz9aSbH9UGIU N9mRHo+U1cF9mYhy42HUvyTrvbp5vl9HtvCP0rRabxIk5ERha/FwRjM9Vj0W3AjYLK9R UZd1L/PU6R2Noj4wxt23CO/flY2EYKBhN9R0GtbuA5HkJxjzDaeNT5qFmpCqAvYPgSI7 d9XA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAW6uiu5cOQCZqnxKmdo45T+ilDPQ7gPuVaYK3JbK5eEN9S12no8 e5S9jqjauUyWnmijJKfebq1AwEuELDoZuOkDp/MjJdpm0ym/Ow==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwXEV1e1IvdkvJjiDc41GOmV2bnfRSGDGq2R8BpSiSOS6IXlKghgZ62eB9mnVe1uce4CguX5yhZcSMRoa2Q/4A=
X-Received: by 2002:a24:cc89:: with SMTP id x131mr7582785itf.121.1553460452236; Sun, 24 Mar 2019 13:47:32 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <da050573-8a39-5dd1-c54f-d5faf2da469b@asgard.org> <ab7fae17-f620-fb97-01b6-b9a92c73dd0f@si6networks.com>
In-Reply-To: <ab7fae17-f620-fb97-01b6-b9a92c73dd0f@si6networks.com>
Reply-To: ek@loon.co
From: Erik Kline <ek@loon.co>
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2019 21:47:19 +0100
Message-ID: <CAAedzxq__bZiX+vg9mKd6MEo0qV9N_oo9B7Q-api3+S-j7gx6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum-01
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Cc: IETF IPv6 Mailing List <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/kAwWRChxdS-uV95t_rR0510lHis>
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: Sun, 24 Mar 2019 20:47:35 -0000

To restate thoughts from IEPG this morning and from hallway
conversations thereafter, I think it would suffice to add some
"loopback detection".  Basically, if a host has cause to think a
router no longer routes a PIO onto a link it should start some prefix
unusability detection.

This would basically be a host sending a packet from itself to itself
via the router.  The destination address should be a GUA from the PIO
formed on the interface, but the contents and source address I'm less
sure of (could be from link-local or the same GUA or a different
on-link GUA, could be a ping or a unicast NS or a UDP packet to a port
the host opens, ...).

If a positive packet reflection occurs then that router still routes
the PIO onto the link. If there's no such response within $TRIES
across $SECONDS, then assume that router doesn't forwarding that PIO
onto the link.  (Note that the PIO might still be valid on-link as
specified by a 2nd router...)