Re: problem statement [was Re: New Version Notification for draft-hinden-ipv4flag-00.txt]

Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> Tue, 21 November 2017 16:18 UTC

Return-Path: <lorenzo@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 5E499129510 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 08:18:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 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_NONE=-0.0001, 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 PSY2Q3NlsbR9 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 08:18:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yb0-x22b.google.com (mail-yb0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c09::22b]) (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 59DDB129515 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 08:18:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yb0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id i126so4682928ybi.12 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 08:18:35 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=NKH5CW/MN9iXoEBL+/q2y2L5R0bwjboReQQYixWT1zg=; b=ByyqnaUFIq60NW/mh+JDUBKLUts4NrDUV9sugpPg1Ty5cheJPMwEvRaG/aEo510FVo PrUP/5G7xo+jIAJZFbkN4LPFARCfkvsbidt3IjTcQC09/0FlGEJSAfdDdm7MZoyG+mnr 73SaJBFdFLP66uz2nP69iTFmd/3N+kJm9LcdBcATl/Rs2InED0SnRVPIwf2Ou6N94Zbv 7Kp95eyYdYCj4wp0rpivlMUT/Gxz2XxZT35kHDAwTeInfqiQRIDaAR7H9Q82vZcRuZpC 4RwNrZWUK+7F7ncUY3d27HFr5nqjB9uwnMr/HxYqvyJDAO7oodCRaUkAR5uQIP2aKX8v 12oA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=NKH5CW/MN9iXoEBL+/q2y2L5R0bwjboReQQYixWT1zg=; b=OL8EAXXeYoasL5gpLhaXZICCrom81QHf8O7Ps/PbottVELeOAiiW5r4OH4Q5ZS5ocu YMdzNYnu4aQ1DlOICr+1dztn1xsGKvo5QTZPuBIhkgoPHPW+S6STabSPgsPMdG1sWyzJ WazYc1Rc9Qa2tdnQ8XhdmbqyFVGziwzjmpdRdInoOKg2VkWyc6fhbQC9TkoG6Cplrjav /sXxDC/lzr4sKd6iSV1MoQWLS3YI40bUmyuz1b/EGu+IXsrgeFycJCQnd13cbxWDUMG1 9qVs9sjpULOsRUaOGjFKCmmyUwOoiwCF9kv1SzNt7CBmUn11k8z04szxnmbrqgCfOSnC szBw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX7fUXe0Q3shJ2PiUY0SOCeHw9F9KIuYCl2DfXbdre/AGv7UvDTK bdbYeyudVp6oRmR8+IjDk9PfI1RXZCsXvKcV9a8fwM3v2HM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMYA0t2d1x9ZfxiCL8v3/tpCBU+hDaNSnR+vqJYf2a8K8Tj1Ab7ApXpbIyGqKXJzEwUHQ6AK8WMzQAQQtaB14A4=
X-Received: by 10.37.39.67 with SMTP id n64mr11499657ybn.119.1511281114165; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 08:18:34 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.37.4.194 with HTTP; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 08:18:13 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <5A144A78.6060108@foobar.org>
References: <151090059151.22321.3357672601322845792.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <E838C63E-7612-4AA4-9375-854C184D699E@gmail.com> <CAFU7BAQKoWPcEFQZgU3k_d0gUL4en6d2pyNq1V4RMNZ6HrSG8w@mail.gmail.com> <649be36e-5006-7688-448f-bc2794d6a39c@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr3WC+vwL_=0PeiJ_D85NqFVTCkb8c83x-ZtGhAbSELGMA@mail.gmail.com> <5A119443.2030108@foobar.org> <CAFU7BASwgLfkO-4kk9-vba_P+jmcFHD5+Hy_7b3cnNkOSv30wg@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr3pKk22Hkxy4_8YMZYiA4Wwp=6JzdRDKFGdTY1gf=ntfA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1711200848390.32099@uplift.swm.pp.se> <5A12FBE4.9030101@foobar.org> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1711210647151.32099@uplift.swm.pp.se> <5A144A78.6060108@foobar.org>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 01:18:13 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKD1Yr3oQvkSX7ARxfGQVg08=-PTKRFPg1wz_zUKSSAHmMbyMA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: problem statement [was Re: New Version Notification for draft-hinden-ipv4flag-00.txt]
To: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
Cc: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>, IETF IPv6 Mailing List <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c13501af7e68a055e808d26"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/osnTR0lCh70_KbYyFjDUICh2xUU>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 21 Nov 2017 16:18:36 -0000

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 12:47 AM, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>; wrote:

> > Indeed. And I'd rather put this hack in IPv6, as it requires adding code
> > to configure and send an additional RA option compared to requiring a
> > complete IPv4 stack and DHCPv4 code to send some option there.
>
> I agree it will simplify things on the operator side, slightly.  The
> complication on the client side is substantial though,


As an implementer I don't think it would make much of a difference. Yes,
maybe the DHCPv4 option is slightly simpler, but in practice IPv4 and IPv6
provisioning need to be tightly coordinated anyway for things to work well.


> There would also be a requirement
> for the network edge to be able to filter out RAs with this option,


Why is it not sufficient to configure the routers that emit the RAs?