Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-07.txt> (IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture) to Internet Standard

james woodyatt <jhw@google.com> Thu, 16 February 2017 19:51 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 1E882129524 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 11:51:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 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_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, 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 xzLAI91jaGQi for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 11:51:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf0-x234.google.com (mail-pf0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::234]) (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 B6B7A129470 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 11:51:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf0-x234.google.com with SMTP id 202so7725265pfx.2 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 11:51:30 -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=uLTwTkxoI3WTvZ2Sk7r0Il0AJX4UbfE4l80cFZtoFW4=; b=AY2YY6TyvEssYP8HYHsHVB0bg0wQL0y3a95YaDm/cc34STg/D5GqDcZ6tD7LUeWM2U h28bTBGMNCAgRGsg9SLUWq/J0KY30EjZ3FYD92VKFG6HS2GvthkWa2ZKscM6Yfh0Tv6O NvapJETFpDJwTT0gya3DDokuGt0ns8NF3xW+Al4v95N64LN6DTDtdrQdBMihP5dk+9/l jmHp/XddblLWpZBZ+F6XdcJnvCy34DE+wcJkRNNdPVz9QMAzMoym2IOQxA61ls524GjU mGO0vUwCW0Gh2yRY9Stp4ma8DuO3vxtpZkh8ozRDKfvKLz/+KtcCJbM9bsFaEIMyNZML f3pg==
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=uLTwTkxoI3WTvZ2Sk7r0Il0AJX4UbfE4l80cFZtoFW4=; b=oLcoc1pJ7JydYeXrOsoWjoXaL/wK1iDTXpMiPchkUULw+r4F3WOS3nuB8q5kyyZQ9g ukD6bQV+cgkH1+EdJsH1L4PZOk0swKUDuiuXEYdcsLhPqYF591tSdMotneUPNEhO9Yxa lyBccYZdlRurADzRyp6ARfp6/U1aa8NqZQI4E4OPLS3+49Ziz/iF93hwBMm4/gSocjWt 4rVnOE2s0HOXwV7URkuPtRWZbrKXFJuH/3LmdxRFuvZylkoWPqwURrfiiorjYVqW5eVJ sfoXl6fWfQqp7T7uJikkvYswITq7VwbvxrbXm/MTLnb7qR+SjjP7ysvAlI9GIobr8BSW Iv/A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39lBlYnBju+Fi2LOLzOuE81YC7lxQ31BAxHlpXlkE+pArGXPRGuzr9BrkDkjXZ2Ea1bU
X-Received: by 10.99.121.72 with SMTP id u69mr4875946pgc.207.1487274690157; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 11:51:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [100.107.14.163] ([100.107.14.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 67sm15087863pfd.120.2017.02.16.11.51.29 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 16 Feb 2017 11:51:29 -0800 (PST)
From: james woodyatt <jhw@google.com>
Message-Id: <1EB5A669-2B68-40C7-B470-453C83DD88E7@google.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_51A2306B-29AD-440D-9AA0-3BD32C1AFFD7"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-07.txt> (IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture) to Internet Standard
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 11:51:33 -0800
In-Reply-To: <m2lgt6ed7j.wl-randy@psg.com>
To: IETF-Discussion Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <148599306190.18700.14784486605754128729.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAN-Dau0kDiSNXsyq9-xEdS5mzLt-K+MYHqoV8aC8jDVREw8OPQ@mail.gmail.com> <8e5c950a-0957-4323-670f-f3d07f40b4df@gmail.com> <05FD5283-9A15-4819-8362-5E6B2416D617@employees.org> <CAKD1Yr3B+dw83B0+26oUqdVJE==wHUBwoWzfWBJep8f+=uM8xQ@mail.gmail.com> <d9dc153a-61a8-5976-7697-ce1ecc9c8f3f@gmail.com> <4AF83EE6-6109-491F-BE66-114724BB197B@employees.org> <m2y3x6eutl.wl-randy@psg.com> <B76B6864-5827-4AC1-9BF7-8FFF069C10F1@employees.org> <m2lgt6ed7j.wl-randy@psg.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/o-jgQ_PyOAAubeCVyPLziv-xJRw>
Cc: draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis@ietf.org, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, 6man-chairs@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 16 Feb 2017 19:51:32 -0000

On Feb 16, 2017, at 00:45, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>; wrote:
> 
>>>> If your statement is that we only have the 64 bit boundary because of
>>>> SLAAC I believe you are wrong.
>>> 
>>> cite, please.  what else actually needs it?
>> 
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7421
> 
> that excuses it.  cite where it is actually needed to do something
> useful other than slaac.

RFC 6282 compresses IPv6 headers over IEEE 802.15.4 in a way that depends on such networks always having 64-bit network prefix length.

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