Re: Running code (Was: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6only-flag-03.txt)

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Wed, 31 October 2018 23:04 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.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 399CD130E6B for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 16:04:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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=gmail.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 qVFQ9wfrJQgg for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 16:04:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl1-x636.google.com (mail-pl1-x636.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::636]) (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 83037130E5B for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 16:04:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl1-x636.google.com with SMTP id p16-v6so1838898plr.8 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 16:04:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=9I/7eDuXfTXDAtRCZPz1r0y9M7UkmWSo9x75YqrcDVs=; b=Qjv53nJsX7nO0p8FlSDj+0A8/GwEz4xdkYivv/6+G4k5szE2GY55TMiGA0zLeWtN4U aYJRKI5vhNtcE9I16N5Xr/cwZk9x/r61K+md7bKXztapw2lRalkW1kgDLnqlDB9oAlLe Gk9bryBEznjDEb5ZG2xiAcTvU0hCvQFDGB7CitdidGwU/XHHz/OarbcQysAEfVGbLa9G ogS8xgjLYkVvt4FK1+U1HT/XCyxbl221ifbzcUKTn+woVDigFaYWXfjPcE1y2oy905vz cztlAdYpZkrqHzO3LuEOGFAZvdaiOd6GbhD1s1M4wdwOTms1mgSafq0JXG2YjXLV59BE 2rgw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=9I/7eDuXfTXDAtRCZPz1r0y9M7UkmWSo9x75YqrcDVs=; b=t4p29RmzemiJV8UKmXY0IHPNFC8zzRpyMtNPXH9kylMahsTDTN7tBjFawMMkcsnRUP DNAIJWN7NsrZ0mcijzLApzR/LZtrpskMvOSTkRKbepRorAssZ48N0j0L5KhOIPlYyGfn 8Q0gXgt3P6A1JUHQO5NERhhi1mIOV3fdyabq4kjtEAFHmydDFfmZHdccEhQwfjEzE/JT kZXhNJG6XxFH/Dv48gwsEoaEEnMmMPs9qO4MNZgXPa+RawIWzBYvq8QAJbZ8SC2dMRyH vdMZomlF44cEaEf26d1UMQa8Oj8/CpbuPPsIF7ORcUFVNmj+6YAw7Iqxiz+nzDTGId0F h3PA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gJbbfvv0LiTx3Q/eFMOuPAM9joBhFXndYXdPyQFwjbdqyhlE+N2 XTt6anY8zjj7nZ4FazJvxN75gUix
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5dM1T1P3HgVEHVcyUSKw2FOgFhHo1WrQoi88LXUwqMzuRBzt2xwPFHkB3/HmiqSR2Y9651ENw==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:4623:: with SMTP id o32-v6mr5187003pld.187.1541027086703; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 16:04:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.30] ([118.148.76.40]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z63-v6sm32739115pfz.31.2018.10.31.16.04.44 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 31 Oct 2018 16:04:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Running code (Was: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6only-flag-03.txt)
To: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>, Simon Hobson <linux@thehobsons.co.uk>
Cc: 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
References: <9A4368D6-E4B1-474C-9838-B584AF6D70C8@thehobsons.co.uk> <m1gHUMI-0000I6C@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <acb0984ec73b40c9a350a0d144b23835@boeing.com> <20181030183416.wfv47m63w5xk3cqe@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <143d790e624d498c91fbf69b070da007@boeing.com> <20181030210020.66dppz77jeowp722@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <87651dfca4694f599e67abbc593f1787@boeing.com> <7FFB03B9-2629-47D1-A3D1-E4FDD6937BC3@thehobsons.co.uk> <CAO42Z2xeqJN3_MSx8Z5cY_kmVDfm-4C7oWKPbnecbC2Fww6UJw@mail.gmail.com> <E74C0E26-87B6-403E-8052-BD6533C1D79B@thehobsons.co.uk> <20181031154737.3errng2ifcmmzcve@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c10c8cd9-73b4-645b-fafe-9cbd2db673b2@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2018 12:04:41 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20181031154737.3errng2ifcmmzcve@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/l7LQbQ63esLn0wc39UK9rEKoDFQ>
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: Wed, 31 Oct 2018 23:05:02 -0000

On 2018-11-01 04:47, Toerless Eckert wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 10:12:08AM +0000, Simon Hobson wrote:
>>> Because the network operator has actively asserted that there aren't, by actively choosing to set this flag.
>>
>> I agree - that would be the case using the flag. But Albert (to whom the question was asked) asserts that heuristics such as "IPv6 appears to work and we have no active IPv4 connections" is sufficient to determine whether or not to enable IPv4.
> 
> I am asserting that routers can can assert whether there are 
> any IPv4 only hosts on the LAN and only when there are none,
> and if the router itself is also not configured to route IPv4
> would it automatically set the v6only flag.
> 
>>> We're getting into trying to prevent insanity territory with these sorts of corner cases. 
>>
>> I agree. Setting the flag where IPv4 is expected to continue working would be a configuration error - and one that the network admin can fix by unsetting the flag.
> 
> To me any new solution that requires more configuration is always
> a downer. Primarily, everthing new we do should be autoconfiguring,
> and only when sufficient analysis ha been done that this is not
> possible should we continue discussing manual config requirements.
> 
> I have not seen sufficient discussion concluding that this flag
> can not be autoconfigured by routers.

The router cannot perceive the *intention* of the network administrator.
(Not until NMRG and ANIMA have finally decide what "Intent" is, anyway. ;-)
 
>> Doing it by heuristics is prone to soft errors that would be hard to diagnose and harder to fix. But I don't seem to be getting through to Albert on this one.
> 
> Right. either we're able to specify explicit algorithms
> for things or we're just doing a half-baked job.

That isn't really in scope for this draft though. I think we probably have
far too much text in the draft already.

     Brian

> 
> Also i thought you have to say NN/DL/AI and not "heuristic" to
> get funding ;-)
> 
> Cheers
>    Toerless
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>> ipv6@ietf.org
>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>