IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: [dhcwg] [EXTERNAL] Re: I-D Action: draft-templin-duid-ipv6-01.txt

"Manfredi (US), Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com> Thu, 14 January 2021 21:44 UTC

Return-Path: <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.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 24AC43A16CC for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 13:44:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=boeing.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 cSFEFsHhb69i for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 13:44:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from clt-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (clt-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net [130.76.144.162]) (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 ACF0F3A16C9 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 13:44:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by clt-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (8.15.2/8.15.2/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id 10ELiXYI002036; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 16:44:35 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=boeing.com; s=boeing-s1912; t=1610660675; bh=lHRyh5OQJMvHmzFwJi1Ba/PD/t+013gx6t77FFyOifU=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=U/1Rs4rJad0AbzqzuIZCFwt4YK4td5saWys0Wp6XPs20LxZihtI3WScjSq5buM0pD u0N9jufpO7GFoqLRaHR8WWVBTNJ6GLjegY/edZcFO+xpjB5Nl0eUEVDimZzLGjBBEw jh12uGvXFpr5EOIC5ZywJTNt5pLt/ccE2lEF9BNvo1bC3sZKi0G3mBMkL6Hq8/N4N5 /FJpzlWenCQc5m5DcHpvvhalu168NHHWjQ1SH6Sxj1b5QwRqQXQkPIwh236pskmM8N 27vWsUrHLAXj6UQgw9SM2gn0UQp8+NwE+ZX8QtYC0jMj2XLbD+9fbRe0ENNdOl1Rwy JJUfp/4Tce6yA==
Received: from XCH16-07-11.nos.boeing.com (xch16-07-11.nos.boeing.com [144.115.66.113]) by clt-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (8.15.2/8.15.2/8.15.2/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTPS id 10ELiVLn002008 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK) for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 16:44:32 -0500
Received: from XCH16-01-11.nos.boeing.com (144.115.66.39) by XCH16-07-11.nos.boeing.com (144.115.66.113) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.1.2044.4; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 13:44:30 -0800
Received: from XCH16-01-11.nos.boeing.com ([fe80::c57c:39bc:4c0a:384b]) by XCH16-01-11.nos.boeing.com ([fe80::c57c:39bc:4c0a:384b%4]) with mapi id 15.01.2044.004; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 13:44:30 -0800
From: "Manfredi (US), Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com>
To: "Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
CC: IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [dhcwg] [EXTERNAL] Re: I-D Action: draft-templin-duid-ipv6-01.txt
Thread-Topic: [dhcwg] [EXTERNAL] Re: I-D Action: draft-templin-duid-ipv6-01.txt
Thread-Index: AQHW6pX8yc3ymAQ5lU6fdWY1dNPsFaon+1WAgAARawCAAAw8gIAAA4EA//+JViA=
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2021 21:44:30 +0000
Message-ID: <c6e1f4943433433aa4c206450df1cb2a@boeing.com>
References: <cb1cb55e5b634ceea3dde33b8c8816c1@boeing.com> <085F29A9-B8F0-44DF-AD4A-9EFD39FAB183@employees.org> <a337f8f5fa354b5882d097b0d5de59dd@boeing.com>
In-Reply-To: <a337f8f5fa354b5882d097b0d5de59dd@boeing.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [144.115.204.6]
x-tm-snts-smtp: 38A137D258C4F339084F2C78CF9DEB2DCA96464D9BEC553372BAB1C4B52988632000:8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/lG6LghjIl53urQcWkXwQdU0579E>
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, 14 Jan 2021 21:44:38 -0000

-----Original Message-----
From: ipv6 <ipv6-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Templin (US), Fred L

> From: Ole Troan [mailto:otroan@employees.org]
>> 
>> No. I questioned the purpose of having an IPv6 address in something that’s supposed to be an opaque identifier.
>
> And, I said that if it were *truly* opaque to *all* examinations and references, then
there would only ever be *one* DUID type for all time. But, RFC8415 clearly shows
that multiple DUID types are defined and that new ones can be added through
future standards action.

Fred, the questions continue to be not about whether "other types of DUIDs can legitimately be defined in the future," but rather, why should an IPv6 address be used as some arbitrary node label, as opposed to using any of the DUID options already specified. Why insist on using IPv6 addresses for this purpose, in short?

By strange coincidence, I got a similar request a couple of weeks ago, to do the same sort of thing. Use an IP address as an arbitrary node label. I have to admit, I too resisted the idea.

Bert

v2.9.2 | Report a Bug | By Email