IETF Logo Mail Archive

Are IPv6 auto-configured addresses transient?

Vijayrajan ranganathan <vijayrn@gmail.com> Wed, 07 October 2009 16:23 UTC

Return-Path: <vijayrn@gmail.com>
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 DA6B63A68EA for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Oct 2009 09:23:43 -0700 (PDT)
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 IhULxdFUjd-r for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Oct 2009 09:23:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gx0-f215.google.com (mail-gx0-f215.google.com [209.85.217.215]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 085B43A6778 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Oct 2009 09:23:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gxk7 with SMTP id 7so2144222gxk.14 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 07 Oct 2009 09:25:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=BiLlD64rBzC8Z9Ggi7liPF1EVxeTypjsHc5HPrRSmlM=; b=ljXZQPBG2uHiMKV8QFo0hNr2iGqvuQyjZd4ZcnVI/H9RYHImvf9s7lPf9vmL0NGx9U S0yEeoROlnvPddJvP3IWwF/z4c59gBmMPFDtY3ZWy9MCZixjUfOGpmR9yuO/L5jdd7t0 e6oa+CxaqVLWZhLui9xgmBkv64J4zAiRUyubM=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=OGvK1aDDBYBtOc1M94b9biP2DS2Fhm16pQwMKbDbXV6dz0QhtGFrag8290ewlKOICz TvUoZZxKIICO3PzscLN7sdqkLPvEYsQ74t6rPEn95eUjNRVfIx2jHzjrv5/7tPGjihJ0 GOjFX13jNCsTKk8Mhki4pXHyffNUL2+JmPApw=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.91.82.13 with SMTP id j13mr90490agl.112.1254932718865; Wed, 07 Oct 2009 09:25:18 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 21:55:18 +0530
Message-ID: <5988ed3c0910070925iaa3b136jd500d30037946a3a@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Are IPv6 auto-configured addresses transient?
From: Vijayrajan ranganathan <vijayrn@gmail.com>
To: ipv6@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
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: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 16:23:43 -0000

Hi Everyone,
Is there a notion that auto-configured IPv6 addresses based on
globally unique prefixes are transient compared to manually configured
ones?
I know that we could configure them to have infinite lifetimes & such,
but I am thinking of a large IPv6 deployment where these addresses are
expected to be up 24/7. I mean, just the fact that lifetimes could be
modified on the router, the advertising router could become
unreachable etc.

As an IPv6 application developer, would I have to factor in this
"transiency" of autoconf addresses in my design all the time? How safe
& normal
is it to replace all manual IPv6 address configuration with
auto-configuration in a large IPv6 deployment esp in an environment
that is very sensitive
to non-availability of addresses?

Another related question, is it common for a site's global prefix(es)
to change? In this regard, are they any different from an IANA
assigned IPv4
network-id for example?

Thanks & Regards
Vijay

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email