IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: Liaison from BBF

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Mon, 09 November 2009 16:42 UTC

Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
X-Original-To: ipv6@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E17C63A68BA for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 08:42:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2hieUGt-5Apq for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 08:42:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (ipv6.swm.pp.se [IPv6:2a00:801::f]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17F353A6858 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 08:42:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 53EAC9E; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 17:42:27 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 518909A; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 17:42:27 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:42:27 +0100
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com>
Subject: RE: Liaison from BBF
In-Reply-To: <B0147C3DD45E42478038FC347CCB65FE16EDA143@XCH-MW-08V.mw.nos.boeing.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0911091739460.22728@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <60C093A41B5E45409A19D42CF7786DFD4DEDE9BC10@EUSAACMS0703.eamcs.e ricsson.se><200911091500.nA9F0PSm002116@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> <alpine.DEB.1.10.0911091623150.22728@uplift.swm.pp.se> <B0147C3DD45E42478038FC347CCB65FE16EDA143@XCH-MW-08V.mw.nos.boeing.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Cc: "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 16:42:04 -0000

On Mon, 9 Nov 2009, Manfredi, Albert E wrote:

> Doesn't the home modem, or "residential gateway," have hard-coded in it 
> the unique IPv6 prefix for each home? If yes, then why would a home PC 
> host not always have a unique IPv6 address, even if the MAC address 
> might be duplicated in some other home on the broadcast domain?

First of all, we're talking MAC addresses here (ethernet address), not 
IPv6 address. And no, I haven't seen any residential rollout plan where 
IPv6 would be provisioned in the static way you describe, DHCPv6-PD seems 
to be the most popular method seen in discussion. And since the home 
gateway needs to talk to the ISP router in the PoP somehow, this might be 
over a shared broadcast domain, thus the worry about duplicate MAC 
addresses (both in aspect of L2 learning being broken, plus the home 
gateways choosing the same link local address to use on the WAN side).

> And why would ND conducted inside a home go beyond the "residential gateway"?

This is on the WAN-side of the home we're talking about, not in the home 
LAN.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email