IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: New Version Notification for draft-hinden-ipv4flag-00.txt

james woodyatt <jhw@google.com> Mon, 27 November 2017 20:14 UTC

Return-Path: <jhw@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 998D41293EB for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 12:14:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 Q9UShv-4QMZF for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 12:14:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pl0-x22b.google.com (mail-pl0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::22b]) (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 EF33D1293E4 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 12:14:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pl0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id 61so9169364plf.4 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 12:14:18 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=KRfoKIp4aWkKEnkVbGSMt5AbR+dzSsz7VBv1BMyx3nM=; b=QCVa+oT7BcBlIxRurMtAYzcqWsdysRMx1luLHiGE2GKxPsqLlSAbd6FzHJyY7KQrp0 Kzhi82ZBT5fYQDzeGn8yowetsgmuo9adrGY8VIeuWbgCgGx1y4uv0liRV/1MSh4RlpPd vqKIWJ2e1nKeHGs60cXft1Y4UVW3pLql72VMJhEq/N9P/H9LHfhbp63IJUHw9Lrb6ioc 6L/A+58c7o7XzSdAhaVvwIz57t+9xAedGEzzMf2dW00BW1k8nGHMnbEQ13g/MNcW++hj D1zM26g6KMcHomsTuRi2z4k2FAA9xRVDLnMmh/wHP4AhRhdzpsVxn/BEJ5l6y6+qotLc ZC/Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=KRfoKIp4aWkKEnkVbGSMt5AbR+dzSsz7VBv1BMyx3nM=; b=s089asYzj5WBa8xwuTWZq94EKoH9w90HyX6yO/Vg69YLFpVvBmxTR6l4XQOL4qxL19 Rfr6otKDzHYdQeG/MsWgrPGo+U9GvqhhqBNRVWuis+/V3zquJcZGTo2xh4WqDkdYplbH JAcJK5BZhuKgswWTtNdIC7GWbFZFeYQiINhdZ/5iiVzsPI+usJTh23gtKS/Kt59uIXvX qmq3U66ndaNMrmmnfB5SZR88L8oeK+7M5eSj0K2I443PFBSvBAF7DXLRHXI42HfRzBeo 8Re8k96ebnbSfoMjtGMDQofBY5wCLXwIYqtmGhha7FOqsOF99TxTfFGDp+HIZPb5lDgg /aOw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX4tkvxgDhJ9k07fdTOXICJs0/nGHeVAjxtAXPX1jvqbSBk0qDji oJ4h6XmtstSjFTN7BUavOvhCnQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMbbIyVY3SpqQIwax6FJcmGl6CxacgKsO8ivHzqQFOzNFHhaPuV+zrD7GxmQpQeXg6KPrE0oHQ==
X-Received: by 10.159.218.152 with SMTP id w24mr38128919plp.336.1511813658060; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 12:14:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2620::10e7:8:81aa:ef31:38e6:6aaa? ([2620:0:10e7:8:81aa:ef31:38e6:6aaa]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p19sm53302326pfj.140.2017.11.27.12.14.16 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 27 Nov 2017 12:14:17 -0800 (PST)
From: james woodyatt <jhw@google.com>
Message-Id: <D6127261-D47B-422F-BB01-5533A5075779@google.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_2609D9C6-9E0B-4CD9-B1B2-D3E13F8DA6C1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Subject: Re: New Version Notification for draft-hinden-ipv4flag-00.txt
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 12:14:16 -0800
In-Reply-To: <CAFU7BAQKoWPcEFQZgU3k_d0gUL4en6d2pyNq1V4RMNZ6HrSG8w@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>
To: Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com>
References: <151090059151.22321.3357672601322845792.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <E838C63E-7612-4AA4-9375-854C184D699E@gmail.com> <CAFU7BAQKoWPcEFQZgU3k_d0gUL4en6d2pyNq1V4RMNZ6HrSG8w@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/ltNVNUpMHpA6qMkxPZJkZ914Dj8>
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, 27 Nov 2017 20:14:20 -0000

On Nov 18, 2017, at 06:39, Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> It looks to me that when you are saying 'there is no IPv4 support on a link' you mean 'a router does not provide IPv4 connectivity'.  However it still might be IPv4 connectivity within the given broadcast domain and the router has nothing to do with it.

Indeed, and this is an important to distinction to bear in mind. I hope everyone involved in this discussion remembers it.

> If the problem is 'IPv4 broadcast noise on the link' then it should be solved on L2 level and the network should not switch ethertype 0x0800.

Better would be not to switch Ether Type 0x806 when the PTYPE=0x800. Or it should reject configuration via IPCP. Or or or...

> If the problem is 'all those noisy DHCPv4 requests the first-hop router has to drop because DHCP relay is not configured' then the router interface should not accept IPv4 packets at all, problem solved.


If the problem is noisy hosts using IPv4 group communication for mDNS and DHCP discovery, then the problem is the same as “IPv4 broadcast noise on the link” and it should be handled the same way.

If you want to stop link-local IPv4 communication on the link, the right way to do that is by blocking ARP with PTYPE=0x800, and probably some kind of ARP packet that specifically tells IPv4 implementations that this network will never deliver an ARP packet with PTYPE=0x800 to a host so it can stop trying.

If you want to stop noisy hosts trying to reach Internet via IPv4 via an unprovisioned route, then the right way to tell them to shut them up is to decline DHCP requests for IPv4 default router address, and tell host operating system developers that when the only DHCP server on the link is declining to configure any IPv4 default router address, it’s not a misconfiguration: the network really means it, there is no default IPv4 router. (In the PPP case, provide only an IPv4 link-local address.)


--james woodyatt <jhw@google.com <mailto:jhw@google.com>>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email