IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] State of play as of today

"Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com> Thu, 01 October 2015 22:48 UTC

Return-Path: <fred@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60F961A8F42 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 15:48:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -114.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-114.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
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 Urz0WPy-gMzl for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 15:48:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C77B01A8F3D for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 15:48:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3239; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1443739728; x=1444949328; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=GI3MZuh3tm5/xupB4tQ4ryutKo1Uclzi/VP0NGPSqq8=; b=YiP7dQ/lDJcyXZj91ziHOkXU+aDPeDW8QyTfT4/kliBc0wZh4C70aQI1 UPclJrIvuSYfVvinyrPJtJ4ezJzVAD8f2ZwCv9lCO6GKKrkmhYtvBIhGX wb8auy20iudIJMZgQOxcPJNld/f3Gf/r7v6IQgrvIxrqMhg89O8NlhKTk 8=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 833
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CqAgD9tw1W/5FdJa1egydUbgavHo5ODoF7hXkCgTg4FAEBAQEBAQGBCoQkAQEBAwF5BQcEAgEIEQQBAQEnBzIUCQgCBAENBQ6IGAgNzAIBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQETBIkDgm6EKhEBUQcGgxKBFAWFfo97AYJKgWEFZYd+gVCENo0IiEQBHwFDhAJxiDg6gQYBAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,620,1437436800"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="31918831"
Received: from rcdn-core-9.cisco.com ([173.37.93.145]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 01 Oct 2015 22:48:45 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com (xch-rtp-012.cisco.com [64.101.220.152]) by rcdn-core-9.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t91Mmj3E015492 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 1 Oct 2015 22:48:45 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-013.cisco.com (64.101.220.153) by XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com (64.101.220.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 18:48:45 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-013.cisco.com ([64.101.220.153]) by XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com ([64.101.220.153]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 18:48:44 -0400
From: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
To: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" <shemant@cisco.com>, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Thread-Topic: State of play as of today
Thread-Index: AQHQ/JtTzjVknD/1UEWCD7Z5ENLVaw==
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 22:48:44 +0000
Message-ID: <41497FF1-E7F3-4A4C-8434-D9BD54E152B6@cisco.com>
References: <71893E8D-913C-4F12-B159-4E522861A0E4@cisco.com> <75B6FA9F576969419E42BECB86CB1B891690C2BE@xmb-rcd-x06.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <75B6FA9F576969419E42BECB86CB1B891690C2BE@xmb-rcd-x06.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.154.253.79]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_CA537D10-F00F-4A59-B4EE-1F108DA2E642"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/-mBeESH5PZ5XFz9eKIZuLTDHCtY>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] State of play as of today
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 22:48:50 -0000

> On Oct 1, 2015, at 3:41 PM, Hemant Singh (shemant) <shemant@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Fred Baker (fred)
> Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 3:17 PM
> To: v6ops@ietf.org
> Subject: [v6ops] State of play as of today
> 
> 
>> I do have a proposal from Tom Herbert (formerly Google, now Facebook) to discuss https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-herbert-nvo3-ila. This is interesting in the context of allocation of a /64 to a host in a >data center. He tells me that there are a few changes (notably a routable interior address) in a version he is about to post, and that Facebook plans some "canary" deployments to test the concepts. I >tend to think it would be an interesting discussion, but have not heard from the working group.
> 
> If Tom could please update the document with an email that does not bounce back when people contact him for his submission, I'd appreciate it.

He seems to be using tom@herbertland.com

>  Certainly, this work could be discussed including the fact whether the consensus is to remain within the 64-bit boundary between the interface-id vs. not for any IPv6 addressing.
> 
> Other comments:
> 
> In section5.1.2 , the document says "Since migrations should be relatively rare events,".   If migration is a rare event, is it worth solving the task move problem?  Why not stay with "not to migrate" until the task runs to completion and not work on any ILA?
> 
> The WG  and the author could decide if the document serves the purpose for ILA and task move but keeps away from tenant separation because the security  in section 5.2 and its 3rd paragraph which ends in "not considered a significant risk" is questionable.   I suspect security will take lot more effort.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Hemant

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email