IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6-00

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 06 June 2017 23:24 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.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 22704126557 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Jun 2017 16:24:17 -0700 (PDT)
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, FREEMAIL_FROM=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=gmail.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 dJyE4GkgNgvP for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Jun 2017 16:24:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg0-x22a.google.com (mail-pg0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::22a]) (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 B7D38126579 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Jun 2017 16:24:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id a70so32326042pge.3 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 06 Jun 2017 16:24:15 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=TarwgvC+AK5gYBcFZoRaPxkbd2PCCrYJPdPB1mR4jNQ=; b=t6A9ZnHTQkPk3aaaROpYmTGG1TshVOD9vcrXihfx1WWeqQtQidwJ9zqkvzflaK2avr vLs1+q3B0yKnqezXXIZ846Dr71RM0qXvpOArC7bDBwSP2exrSpeWDp319FygIRSoONTh tZpfsQPk7ibHqZfX8IaNH+vEHjMcrMTp7h7hsnDVZgHI9RtOcJgK6d2sgfHo96U6tSZM ouGktxKtTA9Dgepz/wGwiYfsPckw0ijWeJpLVrQJWde5P0iBiOH/pHD8Fl4zOlWRvhbo WdH62VAD8QX/aHZu5HjoKCaiF9uqgPCKYp8aDSGx7b0UXUzKYHRO+jLV81pjjka7rwPH JpvA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TarwgvC+AK5gYBcFZoRaPxkbd2PCCrYJPdPB1mR4jNQ=; b=LvBvlxvJBREzprW35hjudGpjy09nCgZoLIWhVwksIEy7AQ5NLBpOCoAmIWnKRzVHIL f42xVaxbMq9R5dy/lak/9qWZ3pocR4rqgC+kUbnVzH1D1tLzqEZfDknxrSxgfYgmOFkl FekHOEXsyyzttTVbCMK6wVMdehws2QGsVri5qeS/D5dr70s0ypSsc8v6YQNC1iP7bvR6 DtIXq1vhEHPK3SZC6ewuu+iEfE28tKMp5ldlgS9txtMEtoYv44gvMXP/U09w8S96RZ2K Bfep+8TvWwejmWa+JLnfaR1FFrbKLVZ+utEypq9X79fLOk38oxjgtIA1KImxSYVA4iFc QGTg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcBm3fdGuCI33qup2zN245DSoeYJsTHxrJXTkt1q1AUhNyuoC3BY nbEsJl+QVx4sBsn8
X-Received: by 10.84.229.14 with SMTP id b14mr24350810plk.14.1496791455154; Tue, 06 Jun 2017 16:24:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [130.216.38.7] (sc-cs-316051.cs.auckland.ac.nz. [130.216.38.7]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b1sm24638843pfl.70.2017.06.06.16.24.12 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 06 Jun 2017 16:24:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: draft-bourbaki-6man-classless-ipv6-00
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Cc: Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com>, Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-4@u-1.phicoh.com>, IETF IPv6 Mailing List <ipv6@ietf.org>
References: <20170602141112.x64nleqclygz7dwd@Vurt.local> <20170602141259.GD30896@gir.theapt.org> <CAKD1Yr0DtQYvCYLQexhXe_nhb5rjeyhnB4bCveqyO5Xbuwdg1A@mail.gmail.com> <CAKFn1SEdjhsQ3tKPZdbdfF4ArDzw-FZfjQT68gV55Fc-5vzBvw@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr3ppM0UF8HoN8PgS7F0iEmK26ebiuJK=tkAdZnuLWpkZg@mail.gmail.com> <CAKFn1SHASt34ihJmGN0iRFQQzLTMspZfxXHgBjBatXXcRYF4cw@mail.gmail.com> <20170604093119.nt733rb3ymmjssww@Vurt.local> <m1dHTLx-0000DcC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <CAKD1Yr0ZZwRar6D-2bkXBKPYehqqW99+BMtDOjyovR8WDXKzxw@mail.gmail.com> <CAD6AjGTjikAWutcenW8qn7OW8kPM9c_x_yDUy5vQxJmXKL85dg@mail.gmail.com> <91c3c0f4-eb8b-cdf7-b9c9-7d1eecb7fe64@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr0_WR_TB+OC0U1Qt2h6WzUp9EGvrqC1ZKW2mwFeBd3bCQ@mail.gmail.com> <4021a559-5b6d-b3fb-19cd-afbe9041e8f2@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr1wmY3O9Uxe=KRxzCidpyhn3e0zSnikY0K6LK9ue4OzwA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <71c7286c-0e86-5dbe-f9c2-7d473d1de728@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2017 11:24:14 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr1wmY3O9Uxe=KRxzCidpyhn3e0zSnikY0K6LK9ue4OzwA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/qJF490sKUnISOgybS9Y2JUioqTU>
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, 06 Jun 2017 23:24:17 -0000

On 06/06/2017 19:48, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 7:25 AM, Brian E Carpenter <
> brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> The parameter's *current* value, yes. But should we really be fixing
>> the value of the parameter once and for all in the addressing architecture?
>> Why don't we fix it in each IPv6-over-foo, which is what the SLAAC design
>> assumes?
>>
> 
> If that is the authors' goal, then what the draft should say is that the
> IID length is 64 unless otherwise specified by an IPv6-over-foo layer.

As Ole quoted, it says:

"Interface Identifiers should be 64 bit long except
when the addresses are manually configured, or by exceptions defined
in standards track documents."

Maybe there are too many other words?

> That is not what the draft says today.

The difference is the "manually configured" option. I don't see
how we can forbid that.

    Brian

> 
> I also suspect it's not the authors' goal. At least Randy and Job have
> clearly stated that what they want to do is run non-/64 prefixes on today's
> links (Ethernet, maybe wifi), not on some future link layer.
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email