[shim6] Problems with ULID (IP) over longer sessions.

Javier Ubillos <jav@sics.se> Wed, 28 April 2010 12:22 UTC

Return-Path: <jav@sics.se>
X-Original-To: shim6@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: shim6@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D552F28C0E5 for <shim6@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Apr 2010 05:22:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.351
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.351 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35]
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 YTJ4g9aWU5u5 for <shim6@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Apr 2010 05:22:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from letter.sics.se (letter.sics.se [193.10.64.6]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C379528C0FC for <shim6@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Apr 2010 05:21:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.255.253] (h206n3-haes-a12.ias.bredband.telia.com [78.72.156.206]) (Authenticated sender: jav@sics.se) by letter.sics.se (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 456A240992; Wed, 28 Apr 2010 14:21:00 +0200 (CEST)
From: Javier Ubillos <jav@sics.se>
To: shim6@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-G7Nntgq7av1ZjZzfru2Z"
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 14:20:59 +0200
Message-ID: <1272457259.4126.63.camel@bit>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.1
Cc: Zhongxing Ming <mingzx@126.com>
Subject: [shim6] Problems with ULID (IP) over longer sessions.
X-BeenThere: shim6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: SHIM6 Working Group Mailing List <shim6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/shim6>, <mailto:shim6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/shim6>
List-Post: <mailto:shim6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:shim6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/shim6>, <mailto:shim6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 12:22:57 -0000

Hi folks.

Some time ago I heard a discussion about a potential issue with shim6.
That the Upper Layer Identifier (ULID), chosen as the first pair of
locators used in the communication, could cause
problems/confusion/somethingelse when those locators where no longer
used by the hosts. I.e not in the locator lists.

I'm unsure about the details of what would cause the problem or what the
consequences could be.

My own first reaction is that if a software believes it's communicating
with an IP (a shim6 ULID), it might try to spawn more sockets/flows to
that IP.

Have this kind of issues been discussed previously on this list? ( I
couldn't find any discussions about it).
Have any one on this list some more detailed thoughts/experience about
what could cause issues?

I'm asking this because a couple of colleges and I are looking at using
alternative ULIDs which hopefully would be more of a match with session
identifiers/FQDNs or similar.

Thank you
// Javier Ubillos