Re: [MBONED] draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-address-format-03.txt

"Lee, Yiu" <Yiu_Lee@Cable.Comcast.com> Wed, 15 August 2012 13:05 UTC

Return-Path: <yiu_lee@cable.comcast.com>
X-Original-To: mboned@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mboned@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E558421F87D2 for <mboned@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 06:05:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.192
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.192 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.039, BAYES_00=-2.599, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZUyWKK1eCDwn for <mboned@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 06:05:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cable.comcast.com (copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com [76.96.32.253]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ED5C21F87F8 for <mboned@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 06:05:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([24.40.56.114]) by copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com with ESMTP id C7WM3M1.29371430; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 06:45:16 -0600
Received: from PACDCEXMB05.cable.comcast.com ([169.254.7.115]) by PACDCEXHUB01.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::84e8:95f3:f13b:169e%12]) with mapi id 14.02.0309.002; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 09:05:12 -0400
From: "Lee, Yiu" <Yiu_Lee@Cable.Comcast.com>
To: Stig Venaas <stig@venaas.com>
Thread-Topic: [MBONED] draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-address-format-03.txt
Thread-Index: AQHNeuaa/IgIq3EAMUyq5pD/I66ROA==
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 13:05:11 +0000
Message-ID: <E3FAB1F4F41F3A45B287E8D9C53522FD379D4563@PACDCEXMB05.cable.comcast.com>
In-Reply-To: <502AFECA.1090905@venaas.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.3.120616
x-originating-ip: [24.40.55.70]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"; boundary="B_3427866310_2615048"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "mboned@ietf.org" <mboned@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [MBONED] draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-address-format-03.txt
X-BeenThere: mboned@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mail List for the Mboned Working Group <mboned.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mboned>, <mailto:mboned-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mboned>
List-Post: <mailto:mboned@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mboned-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned>, <mailto:mboned-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 13:05:20 -0000

I like the idea to use x and y and explain the flag and scope in the
draft. As you said, we want to be flexible to support T=1, so this is not
a typical IANA allocation. If we get WG census to move forward, then we
can decide how to reserve these prefixes.


On 8/14/12 9:43 PM, "Stig Venaas" <stig@venaas.com> wrote:

>On 14.08.2012 14:43, Lee, Yiu wrote:
>> Hi Stig,
>>
>> Since we want T=1, this will not meet the "well-known" requirement
>>defined
>> in RFC4291. If we don't want to define a flag, what is the proper way to
>> describe ffxx:8000::/20 and ffxx:0:8000::/96?
>
>You could list them for all values of xx perhaps. I would maybe use
>"x" and "y" and then discuss the allowed values.
>
>There are scope relative allocations today, the main thing is that we
>don't want to require the flags to be "0". Or maybe we want to require
>the T-bit to be set. As I wrote earlier, I would think of these
>addresses as transient, and T=1 is required for Embedded-RP etc.
>
>The issue though is that if T=1, then it is not really an IANA
>allocation as I see it, because IANA allocations have T=0. But if there
>is IETF consensus, then one can still reserve these prefixes.
>
>Stig
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Yiu
>>
>>
>> On 8/13/12 7:18 PM, "Stig Venaas" <stig@venaas.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 13.08.2012 14:46, Brian Haberman wrote:
>>>> On 8/13/12 4:21 PM, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
>>>>> Hi authors,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the revised draft, I find that the revision is in the
>>>>>right
>>>>> direction.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am confused on the prefix lengths:
>>>>> on Figure 2,
>>>>> ffxx:8000:0:abc::/96
>>>>> while in Section 3.1
>>>>> ffxx:8000::/20
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The x's correspond to the flags and scope fields within the multicast
>>>> address.  Take a look at:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-multicast-addresses/ipv6-multicast
>>>>-a
>>>> ddresses.xml#ipv6-multicast-addresses-4
>>>
>>> We have one minor issue here though. They cannot simply be IANA
>>> allocations, since they would not have the transient bit set. In
>>> this case, the idea is that it should work for flag nibble values
>>> like 1, 3 and 7. Actually I believe the transient bit should always
>>> be set for these groups.
>>>
>>> Stig
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> How come these are reserved prefixes?
>>>>> What are the values that are reserved?
>>>>>
>>>>> If you look at RFC 6052, the unicast translation specification,
>>>>> 64:ff9b::/96 is defined as the Well-Known Prefix. There are no x's in
>>>>> the prefix definition.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Behcet
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 1:49 AM,  <internet-drafts@ietf.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
>>>>>> directories.
>>>>>>    This draft is a work item of the MBONE Deployment Working Group
>>>>>>of
>>>>>> the IETF.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>           Title           : IPv6 Multicast Address With Embedded
>>>>>>IPv4
>>>>>> Multicast Address
>>>>>>           Author(s)       : Mohamed Boucadair
>>>>>>                             Jacni Qin
>>>>>>                             Yiu L. Lee
>>>>>>                             Stig Venaas
>>>>>>                             Xing Li
>>>>>>                             Mingwei Xu
>>>>>>           Filename        :
>>>>>> draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-address-format-03.txt
>>>>>>           Pages           : 13
>>>>>>           Date            : 2012-08-09
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Abstract:
>>>>>>      This document reserves two IPv6 multicast prefixes to be used
>>>>>>in
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>      context of IPv4-IPv6 interconnection.  The document specifies
>>>>>>an
>>>>>>      algorithmic translation of an IPv6 multicast address to a
>>>>>>      corresponding IPv4 multicast address, and vice versa.  This
>>>>>>      algorithmic translation can be used in both IPv4-IPv6
>>>>>>translation
>>>>>> or
>>>>>>      encapsulation schemes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-addre
>>>>>>ss
>>>>>> -format
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's also a htmlized version available at:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-address-for
>>>>>>ma
>>>>>> t-03
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-addre
>>>>>>ss
>>>>>> -format-03
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>>>>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> MBONED mailing list
>>>>>> MBONED@ietf.org
>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> MBONED mailing list
>>>>> MBONED@ietf.org
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> MBONED mailing list
>>>> MBONED@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> MBONED mailing list
>>> MBONED@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned
>