IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6-00

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Mon, 12 June 2017 01:04 UTC

Return-Path: <fgont@si6networks.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 32834129B48 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 11 Jun 2017 18:04:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 UwfilzDUSiDx for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 11 Jun 2017 18:04:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fgont.go6lab.si (fgont.go6lab.si [91.239.96.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0DABC129B44 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 11 Jun 2017 18:04:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.185] (unknown [105.165.196.85]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by fgont.go6lab.si (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3A39782ABA; Mon, 12 Jun 2017 03:04:52 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: Re: draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6-00
To: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Cc: 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
References: <20170602141112.x64nleqclygz7dwd@Vurt.local> <20170604093119.nt733rb3ymmjssww@Vurt.local> <m1dHTLx-0000DcC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <CAKD1Yr0ZZwRar6D-2bkXBKPYehqqW99+BMtDOjyovR8WDXKzxw@mail.gmail.com> <CAD6AjGTjikAWutcenW8qn7OW8kPM9c_x_yDUy5vQxJmXKL85dg@mail.gmail.com> <91c3c0f4-eb8b-cdf7-b9c9-7d1eecb7fe64@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr0_WR_TB+OC0U1Qt2h6WzUp9EGvrqC1ZKW2mwFeBd3bCQ@mail.gmail.com> <4021a559-5b6d-b3fb-19cd-afbe9041e8f2@gmail.com> <34A29D4D-3670-40BC-B62E-85C4EABC55D5@employees.org> <6e03e25e-fd6a-6311-390e-4834281a76f7@si6networks.com> <1B580CBB-B29D-4860-9EC8-BECD1D5E0006@employees.org> <4b2f5200-86a1-7711-e5ff-7436572be467@gmail.com> <E02C4C99-155A-4358-A845-F00F8BB071C1@employees.org> <b3ca5271-21b1-ab33-2dff-82735ebe9128@gmail.com> <235143da452c4ff4aec39a26ba918e7e@XCH15-06-11.nw.nos.boeing.com> <1489a50a-2616-f9ac-4109-16c595e15f90@gmail.com> <df8830b80f714a369be3b9f5ba311b11@XCH15-06-11.nw.nos.boeing.com>
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Message-ID: <6e69030c-021e-df61-77e8-78383833ff44@si6networks.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 04:02:21 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <df8830b80f714a369be3b9f5ba311b11@XCH15-06-11.nw.nos.boeing.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/l7pPGjAD8flps4hZOelGnfIyKzs>
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: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 01:04:10 -0000

On 06/12/2017 01:14 AM, Manfredi, Albert E wrote:
[...]
>>> ULAs and link local would need to create IIDs with no knowledge
>>> of the outside world. But not SLAAC.
>> 
>> ULAs have nothing to do with it; SLAAC doesn't care whether a 
>> prefix is ULA or globally reachable.
> 
> I think you missed my point. When the host forms either a ULA or a
> LLA, the host must do so with no knowledge of anything external to
> itself. So sure, the IID in those two examples has to be predictable.
> Instead, there is no valid reason for the IID used in SLAAC to have
> to be formed independently that way, other than "that's how it's done
> now."

Agreed for LLAs. But... what's special about ULAs?

-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email