IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Snac] [v6ops] "router cascade with DHCPv6-PD"

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Thu, 02 February 2023 16:01 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
X-Original-To: snac@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: snac@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF562C1575D2 for <snac@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Feb 2023 08:01:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4z79GLPllkj9 for <snac@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Feb 2023 08:01:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt1-x831.google.com (mail-qt1-x831.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::831]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5447C1575C8 for <snac@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Feb 2023 08:01:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt1-x831.google.com with SMTP id h24so2295995qta.12 for <snac@ietf.org>; Thu, 02 Feb 2023 08:01:42 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=cTYhw/0qVrZxfygdPpIJWJJWtV+cwy8V3wwIj7Qlmv8=; b=HEjdlQPYHjzD78HlpBG9PDkUc7XatiqPKKnltJ8MPFaelh8/0iGYZSgcstjg9ZqJL4 langVGG6eSb7UVxo4jHJN03/4gB/fwhRCfxLEBhrvakh7mBeAAX9Gwh6UYBRDhW7Sifa b2IRb4GPtk/DoOPonhjMBcYQbmYLL+iTSJ2ZFcqKSZy3zShuH5UtWCIH1Q6xe3P7wllS iKz8v2nAUwZQUqgYmTdJF7wQU95X+/WV+cNQ0xYCB6SGReQYGXEEhMc6VeBaPSrDxNv/ UTkXZdqbG8TK4s64BJtTfpefOtt/FPmtRTy68zpSIBcmqP8Qp6UXb485N3OVAI5FVd5D ctzg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=cTYhw/0qVrZxfygdPpIJWJJWtV+cwy8V3wwIj7Qlmv8=; b=bDYB5R5VulQz+PXN+6Mx/cB/6PQmjMHVIhmTOFOXuIWx9woGvwgJCxUBfgLCz0Xbgx xeSJmSNfShnzjLaoX8bTHqkehkCL+Y7ItrE2G98ifaNT4FNQ94vOaCGW8cjnRUhMBBv4 JOx+HSbHIupG/x1FRXbqC8Tz/stULbtddBDgkNdHyNKZY/Mmx5w5CwpRDK37Vt8pFa1F oCwz5s4WBpDeqiQQ0A3FV3+oSmxgEuHHq2SEPGQcixidFR0bsYkY8ayJmSlVcMovYPqH 07SQO74ZNqD/zutv4QUg1RrtoXUhFc1swYi2kYX2pd/EWU055VmlR/ASaJkbEuw56EiW 9j7Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKWG0bSwY0haxOI2uJjsUvycUjKo9FhNprDeLpYYo4lo2ysEEVzi mChjebzwZfisqA8XzpYq8WcW6t90QOVN2k8hHH/jZp6cbLdac9Db
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+z6YSSqATvHK68eDJRhxU+r2A3pjyw7UEiBkojQr8zMsnec0gbgvvBMsJUC601eczS/yeWApQQJB7mNnYtreQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:351:b0:3b8:6b74:8ab4 with SMTP id r17-20020a05622a035100b003b86b748ab4mr644848qtw.38.1675353701738; Thu, 02 Feb 2023 08:01:41 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Y813Mzn7ucC/YODu@Space.Net> <7EA5E930-4E81-4B79-BBD0-07FACDC5E4B5@employees.org> <Y82U2Sv39Gk9qesd@Space.Net> <729e9054-abcd-5c41-8db8-9b295f36cd05@posteo.de> <CAPt1N1k6zeZBFN1a7zOXrC6g9_5kCSY9t_LKqhES2B6n5c2v9A@mail.gmail.com> <744C2F4B-DB48-4CB3-983B-C126AAE802D8@employees.org> <67cfb26007d9401a858c770bb6de8b53@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <67cfb26007d9401a858c770bb6de8b53@huawei.com>
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2023 08:01:05 -0800
Message-ID: <CAPt1N1=uuHwShPUdhUrRF1aogB8OHmdQ2DXYdbqdvdW_9CGm8g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com>
Cc: Ole Troan <otroan=40employees.org@dmarc.ietf.org>, "snac@ietf.org" <snac@ietf.org>, V6 Ops List <v6ops@ietf.org>, Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr>, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000043ff5c05f3b9ae69"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/snac/jSPTRXvSjL0pLG-ccCNMHCXLm6M>
Subject: Re: [Snac] [v6ops] "router cascade with DHCPv6-PD"
X-BeenThere: snac@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list for discussing problems relating to the automatic connection of stub networks to existing infrastructure networks. " <snac.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/snac>, <mailto:snac-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/snac/>
List-Post: <mailto:snac@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:snac-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/snac>, <mailto:snac-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2023 16:01:46 -0000

DHCP Reconfirm Request works for withdrawal.

On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 7:41 AM Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com>
wrote:

> It looks like we are talking about address appointment. ND is for this
> task by definition. DHCP too.
>
>
>
> ND is capable of announcements and withdrawal.
>
> DHCP is only for an announcement.
>
> Big difference.
>
>
>
> Ed/
>
> *From:* v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Ole Troan
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 2, 2023 4:25 PM
> *To:* Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
> *Cc:* snac@ietf.org; V6 Ops List <v6ops@ietf.org>; Juliusz Chroboczek <
> jch@irif.fr>; Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
> *Subject:* Re: [v6ops] [Snac] "router cascade with DHCPv6-PD"
>
>
>
> Ted,
>
>
>
> Exactly!
>
>
>
> I don't know how you do stable prefix assignment to subnets with NDP/ICMP.
> I'm sure you could, but how much different than PD would it be at that
> point?
>
>
>
> The original prefix delegation proposal did exactly that:
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-haberman-ipngwg-auto-prefix-02
>
>
>
> And the observation was then “this looks just like DHCP, why not use that?”
>
>
>
> O.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 12:22 AM Klaus Frank <klaus.frank@posteo.de> wrote:
>
> I agree, with that. And tbh, I personally think introducing DHCPv6-PD at
> all was a conceptional mistake. It's duties should have been carried out
> by ICMPv6 and NDP...
>
> Also there is no real alternative for environments with dynamically
> assigned prefixes or where clients are roaming between networks and need
> a delegated prefix locally for e.g. Docker or VMs... Except for "use
> DHCPv6-PD to get the prefix, run a DIY script to update configuration
> files and restart radvd and/or bird..."
>
> On 22.01.2023 20:56, Gert Doering wrote:
> > DHCPv6-PD seems to be a half-finished routing protocol already, and
> trying to
> > wiggle around admitting it.
> >
> > Gert Doering
> >          -- NetMaster
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > v6ops mailing list
> > v6ops@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
> --
> Snac mailing list
> Snac@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/snac
>
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email