Re: [renum] SLAAC/DHCPv6 addr-conf operational gaps

Victor Kuarsingh <> Tue, 26 February 2013 13:28 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE24821F8942; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 05:28:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.164
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.164 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Newtwd06mdXF; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 05:28:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c02::231]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B56E21F89A5; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 05:28:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id o25so3461359iad.22 for <multiple recipients>; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 05:28:28 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=x-received:user-agent:date:subject:from:to:cc:message-id :thread-topic:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=iae8H5wdyiqptN1wbjXJHXdtE3oScMSMnXurp5fvnW8=; b=z/oNzNGI/y9cEc//QTyHAfAvyOfuWFmsMmBBv+hdp75reyIZnIdmpcLLLGZKbE6Ucm +ZT0nL7rEmNcaOk/j35tZj7uh8CSURkBAy+BP+sWEngEd/Yct3lik7k6EZSiNL61WGs5 NVOEbq7QK2E7FFCnyWbFHQ8hmBzaaGzoxa/Dj2kOsf33vDUqW5K1AXBs+KfEfvoCJELH JLYxer+jWt+Pe3r9jCvGUGHIvx/VYaY8IpRVY7sRvlE1bXp2KCXXTuZ4lSTAWmVKxi6W 7rsGd7B7QG5iVLCa+uhlwkzGQ9XhCVAlIvM92NCwhjc3r1CrPrzp8VCH66EXXr2vK8em DBXg==
X-Received: by with SMTP id p8mr5446698igl.106.1361885308791; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 05:28:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] ([]) by with ESMTPS id ur12sm334146igb.8.2013. (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 26 Feb 2013 05:28:27 -0800 (PST)
User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 08:28:22 -0500
From: Victor Kuarsingh <>
To: "Liubing (Leo)" <>, "" <>, "" <>
Message-ID: <>
Thread-Topic: SLAAC/DHCPv6 addr-conf operational gaps
In-Reply-To: <>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [renum] SLAAC/DHCPv6 addr-conf operational gaps
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Renumbering discussion mailing list." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 13:28:30 -0000


I as able to review the draft and agree this needs to be documented and
discussed.  I have had many frustrating nights dealing with my multiple
OSs at home and figuring out what behaviour I was trying to expect when
changing the upstream router's settings (M/O/A).

I think the problem space discussion within the draft should be enough to
have a preliminary discussion in the WG.  I know there have been issues in
the past with various opinions on what the M/O bits (for example) should
or should not be used for - or how authoritative they should be.

If the groups can agree that there is in fact a problem, then I would
agree with Arturo that we can have a constructive follow-up
draft/discussion on the corrective action.

Lets get past step 1 and agree there is an issue (or not); then go down
the more sensitive path of agreeing to the corrective action.

Thanks for putting this together.


Victor Kuarsingh

On 2013-02-26 2:14 AM, "Liubing (Leo)" <> wrote:

>Hi, 6man & v6ops
>We submitted a new draft to discuss the SLAAC/DHCPv6 interaction gaps.
>As we know there are several flags in RA messages regarding with the host
>configuration behavior, which are A (Autonomous) flag, M (Managed) flag,
>and O (Otherconfig) flag.
>For some reason, the host behavior of interpreting the flags is ambiguous
>in the standard (mainly RFC4862). I presented a draft discussing M flag
>behavior in 6man @ietf84, and there were some feedbacks arguing the same
>issue. This draft analyzed all the three flags, and provided test result
>of current implementations, it showed the behavior of different
>mainstream desktop OSes have varied. The ambiguous and variation might
>cause operational problems, such as renumbering (used to discuss in
>6renum WG and been documented in the WG drafts), cold start problem, and
>management gaps .etc.
>Your review and comments would be appreciated very much.
>All the best,
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: []
>> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 5:52 PM
>> To: Liubing (Leo)
>> Cc:
>> Subject: New Version Notification for
>> draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-problem-01.txt
>> A new version of I-D, draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-problem-01.txt
>> has been successfully submitted by Bing Liu and posted to the
>> IETF repository.
>> Filename:	 draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-problem
>> Revision:	 01
>> Title:		 DHCPv6/SLAAC Address Configuration Interaction Problem
>> Statement
>> Creation date:	 2013-02-25
>> Group:		 Individual Submission
>> Number of pages: 12
>> URL:
>> 01.txt
>> Status:
>> Htmlized:
>> Diff:
>> Abstract:
>>    This document analyzes the host behavior of DHCPv6/SLAAC interaction
>>    issue. It reviews the standard definition of the host behaviors and
>>    provides the test results of current mainstream implementations. Some
>>    potential operational gaps of the interaction are also described.
>> The IETF Secretariat
>IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>Administrative Requests: