Re: I-D Action: draft-templin-duid-ipv6-01.txt

Ted Lemon <> Fri, 15 January 2021 20:59 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B1043A11B6 for <>; Fri, 15 Jan 2021 12:59:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id viPmA4VJpI4W for <>; Fri, 15 Jan 2021 12:59:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F9F63A11B5 for <>; Fri, 15 Jan 2021 12:59:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id p14so13065248qke.6 for <>; Fri, 15 Jan 2021 12:59:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=ls1lYcKpWyZzKckWKFL/DjLKepRFMNsdRvbaJFyAtbM=; b=WXpfK37SGKOdv+O4vCYJ7R0yziXqovIyNOIh/g/xLXq3N9EZ547GGfdcWRuU7WOVAQ lPu8hbM6stgeD6ZsxijVPpbBsdWrm7OLnMQm7wDxPiSat4ddDuE0yYuyjIewNZv10KBf HPoBpgMnsV5U6YnSOL1fpRd5UlOZ0as6uqZHMnHvT5KJpWMrZciAw9hRW+MMuaGEA5NO xQk5w9dCUdOyL/E59b6ZBbi1f6h/gKDmnl7KduM/o1dgm0J8SGN0f3nd+2MnilIa5q0Y iGe9RAuB5fcX8CYPmjHXF+LTzBFV0p1VDwE2E1C7D5jJ+cfbRNMYP1pfxxtpxYnzB5yI 041Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=ls1lYcKpWyZzKckWKFL/DjLKepRFMNsdRvbaJFyAtbM=; b=h1RNzpgEgoRwtPv2rT+kgKSSw1WXlkzHnTiz5HHiDWdSCjEYH3I4tvKI+4Yg9wN5nS E7ziwH7CHwZr+Pp2AWS/hQta6PJf10olopa2tB1YjBtmsVi2WnnfUuuIQpF8h47AEsy0 HkU6zKWI4SFz2UA83lG8NZQYA/kxgxm7cG7EyThxwMlsKLtgV0n1lRDkaJvqqy8wzdEV uiMEjHjSgIVGUjktfuyZMSomv9EG1wquhiOXMz3j6MFKyNXYSivyEiBNTYGanTHF0U0w KtYNo6p9pSicrKpQojiW2uPRSUPHHzd0Hf7l/CFFDnBZ7pmE1Dj4otMK5D9W7WL5+j6Y 02Jw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530NkxuHTPmWEUTJpHLVwgSTEIZmE9L3oyKcBn/EmILS6PAzH3Ql UcZEcpgPAQ3cL5vIdsx+TRJf5g==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxAuqyNjPcQdCF14JakuYAMLZMfkGHU2ooGo4m/tx4kh+ytzWq216enO1eGwJXab/9NA9Ah7Q==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:15ea:: with SMTP id p10mr14387568qkm.172.1610744344379; Fri, 15 Jan 2021 12:59:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id h22sm5174773qth.55.2021. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 15 Jan 2021 12:59:03 -0800 (PST)
From: Ted Lemon <>
Message-Id: <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_3282E74C-3C76-444C-B5A7-98345175077E"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.\))
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-templin-duid-ipv6-01.txt
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2021 15:59:02 -0500
In-Reply-To: <>
Cc: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <>, Bob Hinden <>, dhcwg <>, IPv6 List <>, "Dickson (US), Sean M" <>
To: "Templin (US), Fred L" <>
References: <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2021 20:59:08 -0000

If you are going to use this in a standards track document, then of course you need to publish a standard to reference that says how to encode the DUID. However, in that case you would need to document the use case for the new DUID type, as Bob and several others have requested.

> On Jan 15, 2021, at 3:53 PM, Templin (US), Fred L <> wrote:
> Ted, the allocation policy for the Private Enterprise Number (PEN) code for users
> of DUID-EN is not Standards Track; anyone and their brother can easily obtain a
> PEN code by filling out a simple form:
> <>
> I did one for “LinkUp Networks”, but that is not in any way tied to a Standards
> Track RFC. IANA did not even ask me any questions; they simply allocated the
> code for free. So, as far as standards status goes, an arbitrary PEN code has no
> standing while the global IPv6 unicast address space has full Internet standards
> status according to RFCs 4291 and 8200. I would therefore see it as a major
> DOWNREF to entrust the entire IPv6 address space to any random person
> who decided to register a PEN code.
> That, plus I don’t want to carry around the extra 4 bytes for a PEN code…
> Fred
> From: Ted Lemon [] 
> Sent: Friday, January 15, 2021 12:31 PM
> To: Templin (US), Fred L <>
> Cc: Bernie Volz (volz) <>om>; Bob Hinden <>om>; dhcwg <>rg>; IPv6 List <>rg>; Dickson (US), Sean M <>
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: I-D Action: draft-templin-duid-ipv6-01.txt
> On Jan 15, 2021, at 3:25 PM, Templin (US), Fred L < <>> wrote:
> using DUID-EN with some
> arbitrary PEN code to encode the entire global IPv6 unicast address space would
> IMHO be an unacceptable DOWNREF.
> You said this before. I don’t understand what this means. DUID-EN is in a standards track RFC. How is this a DOWNREF? And why use an arbitrary enterprise number?