Re: Alternatives to the flag (Was:Confirmation to advance: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6only-flag-05)

Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> Wed, 15 May 2019 13:34 UTC

Return-Path: <nick@foobar.org>
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 7F21C120033 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 May 2019 06:34:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 P2dv8poRnRvK for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 May 2019 06:34:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.netability.ie (mail.netability.ie [IPv6:2a03:8900:0:100::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48F68120025 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 May 2019 06:34:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Envelope-To: ipv6@ietf.org
Received: from cupcake.local (089-101-195156.ntlworld.ie [89.101.195.156] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.netability.ie (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id x4FDYUET067072 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 15 May 2019 14:34:30 +0100 (IST) (envelope-from nick@foobar.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: cheesecake.ibn.ie: Host 089-101-195156.ntlworld.ie [89.101.195.156] (may be forged) claimed to be cupcake.local
Subject: Re: Alternatives to the flag (Was:Confirmation to advance: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6only-flag-05)
To: David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu>
Cc: Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-6@u-1.phicoh.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
References: <F8BFFCAD-E58E-4736-8A1C-56579B6F6032@employees.org> <a2465e81-a17f-ab48-efda-20fe12a70077@foobar.org> <30239E0C-C444-4A7E-8342-AEE47BF8A2BB@employees.org> <20190505200449.GB7546@vurt.meerval.net> <80073906-c3c0-1f22-9e7f-c2b349063936@gmail.com> <CAO42Z2xzVW3m0mN7jEn8SYyYCYhrufVnkfp3rBjJcijBkvucNQ@mail.gmail.com> <CACWOCC-35yVYXSRR0sRL-MBMHyOFZtJx9E9h14G8qqVh5T7qGA@mail.gmail.com> <232c1a43-0fd9-4eae-737b-260a3906f72a@gmail.com> <663F6C0B-7B8A-4088-B9C0-B2867B0C3EB8@gmail.com> <CAN-Dau3VJN7qNHAW-yStMrDRCa4vsDs2ObkAxswnYbcHde2t_w@mail.gmail.com> <m1hPqHO-0000J8C@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <CAN-Dau3R=4JbcbK7tWkJKYzVjq7DvAAEjVsbCLbZdYYO8OJ0YA@mail.gmail.com> <m1hQ7Dm-0000M3C@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <CAN-Dau040j6U+1CCn0QJiVMy2nVShHqqSFdCkM-FbMAH-2wjRA@mail.gmail.com> <m1hQCYr-0000KBC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <CAN-Dau3Lcv3qTBVtig36RfbQKuGpoqdTLfrM=eWfYxCCQRy5Sw@mail.gmail.com> <m1hQfSy-0000LTC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <CAN-Dau3akjaZ-j16ucOY=-d0nabG4ZdFs6wrSD4EGr3NEh9Wsw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
Message-ID: <a646a186-be05-cdff-c8e4-61cf09930494@foobar.org>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2019 14:34:29 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 PostboxApp/6.1.16.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAN-Dau3akjaZ-j16ucOY=-d0nabG4ZdFs6wrSD4EGr3NEh9Wsw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/z73V5VQWlcNHCRz1qhm5WvaCk4s>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 15 May 2019 13:34:36 -0000

David Farmer wrote on 15/05/2019 14:27:
> So, I'm not willing to drop what I think is a viable solution to the 
> problem unless other stakeholders are willing to buy into this kind of 
> change. In particular, I'm thinking the people maintaining mDNS in dnssd 
> wg. I can't see making the change proposed above without their buy-in.
[...]
> So I think we either need the flag or disable RFC 3927 by default on 
> dual-stack hosts.

RFC 2563 already specifies a protocol to turn off ipv4 LLs.

Nick