Re: IPv6 Anycast has been killed by LINUX patch in 2016 - who cares?

Töma Gavrichenkov <ximaera@gmail.com> Sun, 08 August 2021 01:13 UTC

Return-Path: <ximaera@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 D3F4E3A114D; Sat, 7 Aug 2021 18:13:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=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=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 LiQm6DtlXo2H; Sat, 7 Aug 2021 18:13:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ed1-x529.google.com (mail-ed1-x529.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::529]) (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 EA7EF3A114C; Sat, 7 Aug 2021 18:13:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ed1-x529.google.com with SMTP id z11so18992215edb.11; Sat, 07 Aug 2021 18:13:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Q1UOywUGvqY/w7uNgBBnfhAcCpdBAlSCp2IUHIxmtzk=; b=Ptym6WUlmqwztn1LDsSWHvLNY0Cp3xk0aCGGvHqG1RnQlRxIg7biootbHNT8IqLabQ FewpngWJMmXTAtwymwW3fLv7VwnK19f4TfvGJbm8laEMyWlcF7ylqT5CZceEn6uF8nJR 3oV1RSLEtiTKSfWAqk37ayt4qp1u3RJC/Jv6kOmlRQn6L1wC9XL3k5LeSwmd9n6MedTW kB59hRkIfDt1gXWtPjX8SWBzLcTNH5jQZjHFZwosoiiIDNZ9rE7cT0ykJqnuCRfeUS/J XRnvSEu4YLdKvVwKkcUkuHojrZcszMF+8p2A9y+gDjPzoZ2L2I8AXfRwMm0dObiM5vKf fuyg==
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:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Q1UOywUGvqY/w7uNgBBnfhAcCpdBAlSCp2IUHIxmtzk=; b=Ed4zju/5mlpK/2Kt63LGVANt80yEWRhm4SnIEGLT6GV2gt0cVLn4bI+Yzf+kfci5iK 4nmTGrXth0fwJyu6nhQjAZcevDCMinLS/WvkAcYdcmhCqi+DhTB9gGrIrS0N1/ho0zmI ojymHjz/gQHrj2nr3APlPBi8drPY48B1KT4uzFsZLmP5srMl4wIYN/U4BJnEpOZiLkaA xEHNlBTrWIPxp27ErG95wS2zuoIey3HaaaugkPJz7jy/Y8qj6hgpjP596v2xfTW2yViw qCEyH2lkCXPHET5+JkSpmZW5uQFllNtYUDQZQarGmRrE/QP0ek/40oE3B3BBTtCAyosn O9Jg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532MdAVsPPviNJa/cXMnDSh27qUf0dlYF+1VEx575NEHi9IzzTag 809Db71Nqozp24w/ocWgcK3K5DFVphvjVB4yYzc=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwwjwwOdE+drOqD6BxhRRguCqBNYO0fSKXsQHOYzuaYv1oE/REwxboaRiQYz9DmuxuUScbK2C4O9OYvF3Czmqg=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:2297:: with SMTP id cw23mr21132901edb.329.1628385207058; Sat, 07 Aug 2021 18:13:27 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <db8c1a5534e9412ebcfa37682d75f862@huawei.com> <C23D7023-B5B7-47C6-8AC5-65A98822A724@lurchi.franken.de> <CANMZLAZGawUjRhSSE_rA8AyqMx=mx1WFeJ_tZq0KVEXJd2XBfQ@mail.gmail.com> <20210807014730.GA28901@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <CAO42Z2yezZh5-B0PwCuNt2FUMAW-FjMK8QZ8uL4TsPhs26zziw@mail.gmail.com> <20210807151716.GA3098@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <CALZ3u+a_7XQ+R8mV+9KzwRwxa0riP-QD_2R69ycV0NL9jy_S3Q@mail.gmail.com> <20210807175410.GA63079@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <CALx6S36b33LD_hNFvptOJuny4g98=dhq3RtKsGeLx3ks-yYjFg@mail.gmail.com> <6F63D7FE-8768-4BD8-846E-61E50E44228F@lurchi.franken.de> <CALx6S36pbw2angEmDpu5DnX2nix9KgxFs7ExU17x+JXQFs23TA@mail.gmail.com> <CALZ3u+Yt2X3faSVW7K0eaxmaQy6iA6p4=f0c4E_F4CP0tfjHYw@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S343sL0=5wUTRSXMnhSamjTTZU=DzA9Y+dbJ4NRTu0_83w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALx6S343sL0=5wUTRSXMnhSamjTTZU=DzA9Y+dbJ4NRTu0_83w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Töma Gavrichenkov <ximaera@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2021 04:13:14 +0300
Message-ID: <CALZ3u+aBvYOChJ_bEybs1U37prBwt_sRRRwFSrO4PkUMsy3nxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: IPv6 Anycast has been killed by LINUX patch in 2016 - who cares?
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Cc: Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d3032205c901f934"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/n-M7zs0B2eDS8tqEOx_IFcTZrNk>
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, 08 Aug 2021 01:13:35 -0000

Peace,

On Sun, Aug 8, 2021, 3:50 AM Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> wrote:

> why not just
> embed the transport layer information in the IP address? e.g. maybe
> the ephemeral port number, so that the packet is always routed
> properly to the server instance regardless of how it's routed to the
> destination.
>

How's that better than the IPv6 anycast (which is a very different beast
that the BGP anycast, by the way)?

--
Töma

>