IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Extending a /64

Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-6@u-1.phicoh.com> Thu, 12 November 2020 12:29 UTC

Return-Path: <pch-b9D3CB0F5@u-1.phicoh.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 7F6523A07D1 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 04:29:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 KyS86QAq619d for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 04:29:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (stereo.hq.phicoh.net [130.37.15.35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 210463A07C4 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 04:29:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (localhost [::ffff:127.0.0.1]) by stereo.hq.phicoh.net with esmtp (TLS version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305) (Smail #157) id m1kdBjQ-0000DpC; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:29:40 +0100
Message-Id: <m1kdBjQ-0000DpC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
To: ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Extending a /64
From: Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-6@u-1.phicoh.com>
Sender: pch-b9D3CB0F5@u-1.phicoh.com
References: <005ECBB3-088B-4363-BB53-8D4AD25CA3D2@employees.org> <b468124f-f85b-7e20-a354-c6b7eaba3447@mccallumwhyman.com> <20593.1604972743@localhost> <CAKr6gn0tedRz4iBu49Lrw5qMCdXWPcg-66UAOfHeJ_ZUeq8U4g@mail.gmail.com> <CABNhwV2c_qaQGY2J62LDh=EZYHo5poYNF_Asf908ofR3wfmW1g@mail.gmail.com> <CABNhwV3wgdOUKqOyqJ4bTvVv4PKq81anYCxASOTCEMg3T84zig@mail.gmail.com> <CAL9jLaaDYrXVTGQeWh4aAc-qUVCoxRNokwANpQhuZ4OGdpySMw@mail.gmail.com> <46a202df-bae8-626b-042a-72adc3d31fcc@gmail.com> <CABNhwV0eRYx9jaygAaZ=KZ45zz-X3+Un17Oi8gv2wzf2-HzXMA@mail.gmail.com> <CABNhwV3cYvdssqK8EJ+_goH5_tLi0vm_Dy5M4bj+-Mp_yVaReg@mail.gmail.com> <m1kdANg-0000IEC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <alpine.DEB.2.20.2011121301300.15604@uplift.swm.pp.se> <m1kdBWP-0000I8C@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <alpine.DEB.2.20.2011121324150.15604@uplift.swm.pp.se>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:25:38 +0100 (CET) ." <alpine.DEB.2.20.2011121324150.15604@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:29:40 +0100
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/nTeYb9jBWXTBQ6QJ_0BdR4tw46Q>
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, 12 Nov 2020 12:29:44 -0000

>> So just like ND has NUD to verify that a neighbor is still there, we 
>> need something to verify that prefix is still there. Ideally we can 
>> extend that to SLAAC and DHCP PD and have a model where changes in an 
>> upstream link can propagate downstream realiably.
>
>If we do PIO-X you can send RS if you're unsure if other end still is 
>there. If you get same PIO-X as last time, that's confirmation.

Yes, we can write for example that a user of a PIO-X SHOULD send an RS
every minute and verify that the received RAs still contain the prefix.

That would be perfectly fine with me.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email