I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-enhanced-dad-01.txt

Ray Hunter <v6ops@globis.net> Sat, 08 September 2012 11:18 UTC

Return-Path: <v6ops@globis.net>
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 CC44121F8691 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 8 Sep 2012 04:18:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2XkPsVfrsJDG for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 8 Sep 2012 04:18:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from globis01.globis.net (RayH-1-pt.tunnel.tserv11.ams1.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f14:62e::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC30621F867C for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 8 Sep 2012 04:18:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by globis01.globis.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2E608700B1; Sat, 8 Sep 2012 13:18:29 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at globis01.globis.net
Received: from globis01.globis.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.globis.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HeVnlmIbLOyj; Sat, 8 Sep 2012 13:18:00 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from Rays-iMac-2.local (unknown [192.168.0.3]) (Authenticated sender: Ray.Hunter@globis.net) by globis01.globis.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 221E8870071; Sat, 8 Sep 2012 13:18:00 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <504B2961.5060605@globis.net>
Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2012 13:17:53 +0200
From: Ray Hunter <v6ops@globis.net>
User-Agent: Postbox 3.0.4 (Macintosh/20120616)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: draft-ietf-6man-enhanced-dad@tools.ietf.org
Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-enhanced-dad-01.txt
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: 6man Mailing List <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Sat, 08 Sep 2012 11:18:46 -0000

I have read this draft, and think this work is important.

Some dumb questions for your consideration:

Since the (tentative) IID and DAD operation is address and interface 
specific; as well as the nonce, should the node also remember on which 
interface the NS(DAD) was sent, and also for which (tentative) address?

Should the node generate a separate nonce per instance of the DAD 
algorithm, or per interface initialisation?
[DAD may be performed multiple times for initialising a single 
interface, and these may run in parallel if there are multiple prefixes 
per interface, or if temporary addresses are in use as well as SLAAC and 
DHCPv6...]

Section 4.3 says "an interface on the node"

What should a receiver do if a node receives its own NS(DAD) on another 
interface other than the source interface which is performing DAD?
[use case: two L3 interfaces on one node connected to one common L2 
link, where one interface re-initialises or wants to use a new temporary 
address and thus performs DAD. That isn't a loopback condition or error 
condition at all if that NS(DAD) packet is received on the other interface.]

I think the text in section 4.3 could do with some clarification on 
sending and receiving interfaces.

There are high availability situations that intentionally cause 
collisions of IID and a virtual IPv6 address [e.g. HSRP IPv6].
Do these need to be explicitly excluded from this draft? Or is that 
someone else's problem?
[There is a table on the relevant manufacturers website labelled Table 
19 "HSRP and IPv6 ND Addresses " which shows when the virtual MAC/ 
Virtual IPv6 is used for messages. AFAIK DAD is never performed on the 
virtual address, as prevention of duplicate addresses is handled in the 
HSRP protocol itself]

There are high availability cases where multiple NICs are connected in 
parallel [Teaming].
Does this require any special treatment? Or simply a clarification that 
DAD is performed on the resulting virtual NIC interface or LACP bundle 
rather, than individual physical links? Or is this plain obvious?

When is it safe for a node to garbage collect the stored nonce?
When should a node garbage collect the stored nonce [e.g. to  cover 
equipment moves and interface re-patching]?
Once DAD completes?

Regards,
RayH

> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
>   This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Maintenance Working Group of the IETF.
>
> 	Title           : Enhanced Duplicate Address Detection
> 	Author(s)       : Rajiv Asati
>                            Hemant Singh
>                            Wes Beebee
>                            Eli Dart
>                            Wes George
>                            Carlos Pignataro
> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-6man-enhanced-dad-01.txt
> 	Pages           : 11
> 	Date            :2012-09-06
>
> Abstract:
>     Appendix A of the IPv6 Duplicate Address Detection (DAD) document in
>     RFC 4862 discusses Loopback Suppression and DAD.  However, RFC 4862
>     does not settle on one specific automated means to detect loopback of
>     Neighbor Discovery (ND of RFC 4861) messages used by DAD.  Several
>     service provider communities have expressed a need for automated
>     detection of looped backed ND messages used by DAD.  This document
>     includes mitigation techniques and then outlines the Enhanced DAD
>     algorithm to automate detection of looped back IPv6 ND messages used
>     by DAD.  For network loopback tests, the Enhanced DAD algorithm
>     allows IPv6 to self-heal after a loopback is placed and removed.
>     Further, for certain access networks the document automates resolving
>     a specific duplicate address conflict.
>
>
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6man-enhanced-dad
>
> There's also a htmlized version available at:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-enhanced-dad-01
>
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-6man-enhanced-dad-01
>
>
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/