Re: 64share v2

Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com> Tue, 10 November 2020 22:03 UTC

Return-Path: <cb.list6@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 A77C23A1089 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 14:03:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.847
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.847 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_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, 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 Xrdh86Idx0xu for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 14:03:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-io1-xd2a.google.com (mail-io1-xd2a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2a]) (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 E62C53A1088 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 14:03:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-io1-xd2a.google.com with SMTP id o11so25470ioo.11 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 14:03:38 -0800 (PST)
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=zTP9KT5dPmp5ZOIceWmdu/oNZrIBlccUY7zRjz0Tk+0=; b=nBuNb3Un9XIszXkRs6vBOm9BoXNnQmxmiRSjVGm3lGhnDZh3V3Ndwmn5Bpx9fRWwju SjvEFUgNYlMlD4YEmJN7464PvldS1a+ZhjHi4bhB+rJJrx7qc8V/tsqqMlQBTljWgxia bcS733Q2GSCCWbd5i5gahhWQeD+1/Iq1egb6MAfdLtRMwlLF3WfbYcYwBVIIwk5wmyav EQ/dNwzHB9sLSu1I+D5CKQniRGUfUy6xOUA7VJqk9SyHpcNVQ+FybUAbxHQiFCShNJjP Qw1AYy5lMgrexvtb/Vrw4wF3LJLkG1L7MjtQIzkWmaI44tTBg3W/QTloArTnLs4pzEYn /2pw==
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=zTP9KT5dPmp5ZOIceWmdu/oNZrIBlccUY7zRjz0Tk+0=; b=ei3E1uqfaBizLsnfarZq3xXvYdqFqTkqi2lDY5Jf6/4D1eyINlnDWFG1rFUHmYODPx YdW7HCxZNn5Hl0wVIVs/j54ApS9i1Qur+PzA5ojFBTJFfaB879FSFcspFsf0MCcN73XM 5iUFClQ4zer9kCCRib5yXHQhD2kOIEnjpx2eNUKT0J1PzFJ5eF+Ik8ss/1BJ79HgOmJG DFqCjQrnNjFbTmcWp+/Ovwp/dKXSEhVWNWd5ns+JATfSMx64Zww2ukkflhQi1p0psxm8 e37yudOh+D5yPocaiSlItUyQXtNivfeO5yZMpQ2C3eaNlVVholfTvReru5V/42NZFCUL bIyQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533AdeOguiPyrKF8q4sbAwTUwcAwvoNAszG8mRkQKHRgMFDN7KnY F4vcrXcRV1nJNtWRFRg8Y6fC4o/q/birsvP0LgE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwAmFT4OmssRxRd7AGHsly/cL0az8RU/IImVEYeWLvOz8G1I/Tq4A73u8Bhb4zVae1zCg8VKNCbI85jHk2Tiz8=
X-Received: by 2002:a02:7f16:: with SMTP id r22mr16783765jac.19.1605045818171; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 14:03:38 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAD6AjGR-NE_sJ_jp7nAT6OvNkcdE9qoWuGEiiVW7r9YtsQvbbw@mail.gmail.com> <43ebd660-3df6-bc9c-2ef3-bbfd72a64229@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <43ebd660-3df6-bc9c-2ef3-bbfd72a64229@gmail.com>
From: Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 14:03:27 -0800
Message-ID: <CAD6AjGQRyDDhVtunyCrWDBABG576oi=5xd1Lmz5=QicOJ6YsNA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: 64share v2
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Cc: 6man <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d727aa05b3c7d93b"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/nMR2XYh9Va5-OgfTjRYEIMwijGs>
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: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 22:03:41 -0000

On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 1:49 PM Brian E Carpenter <
brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 10-Nov-20 21:10, Ca By wrote:
> > Folks,
> >
> > In an effort to progress the conversation, i created a simple and rough
> pre-00 i-d (as ietf is not accepting submissions now) for your review and
> comment
> >
> > https://pastebin.com/duyYRkzG
>
> I'm having difficulty reconciling that with what I read at:
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/0d7lSiP_78td3vWBlMnVvmp7UAo/


> If that email is correct, the 3GPP model is tightly bound to
> the /64 boundary and to the notion of giving a single address
> and predefined Interface ID to the UE.



This is not a correct summary. I believe rfc6459 describes it clearly. The
ue receives an off-link  /64, the iid is simply a hint and typically not
used. This is why rfc7278 works.

Also, since /64
> is still fixed by the addressing architecture, and RA PIOs
> are constrained by that architecture, I don't understand how
> a UE can be "given a prefix such as a /56 using RA".
>

The i-d is to requests the 3gpp to make a change to allow < 64 via RA



> Perhaps someone familiar with 3GPP internals, e.g. the authors
> of RFC6459, can comment?
>
> Regards
>     Brian
>