IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Making RDNSS a MUST?, hum v2

"STARK, BARBARA H" <bs7652@att.com> Fri, 07 April 2017 13:36 UTC

Return-Path: <bs7652@att.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81A8A126C3D for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 06:36:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.397
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.397 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.796, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 541vrYiCHSLE for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 06:36:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D61891242EA for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 06:36:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0049295.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049295.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id v37DZHIV011314; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 09:36:36 -0400
Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by m0049295.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 29pbar7vqn-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 07 Apr 2017 09:36:36 -0400
Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v37DaZH9026923; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 09:36:35 -0400
Received: from alpi131.aldc.att.com (alpi131.aldc.att.com [130.8.218.69]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v37DaUE8026861 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 7 Apr 2017 09:36:30 -0400
Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAD.ITServices.sbc.com (GAALPA1MSGHUBAD.itservices.sbc.com [130.8.218.153]) by alpi131.aldc.att.com (RSA Interceptor); Fri, 7 Apr 2017 13:36:11 GMT
Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.5.165]) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAD.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.218.153]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 09:36:10 -0400
From: "STARK, BARBARA H" <bs7652@att.com>
To: Philip Homburg <pch-v6ops-7@u-1.phicoh.com>, "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] Making RDNSS a MUST?, hum v2
Thread-Index: AQHSrohJPytzlZ90JUCxvg9piYpj0aG4bByAgAAIrICAABMJgIAARnoAgAABUoCAAAGpAIAAAN2AgAE9QYD//84VyoAAQ22A//++PCeAAER/gP//wkqhAABzBwA=
Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2017 13:36:10 +0000
Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DB163E4@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com>
References: <CAKD1Yr2FMvpgjSPv-1cdWQGTFzB8oRCvm=57MgOv=tH11awpOA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJE_bqfXJG+-CXZnOaeerKZMpk-TnZxgv=onJSudX6oYQBo7_w@mail.gmail.com> <m1cvhA2-0000G1C@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <914B3454-58A4-4130-8B90-6371100D619D@fugue.com> <CAN-Dau1=9HXni9XydcWOO6r8SKrOeOXfqo=Vx=NUoNtUze8dfA@mail.gmail.com> <F94218CB-2F61-42D1-AFBC-8F2F18264C4F@fugue.com> <CAN-Dau3KpVyyVZZcM26+SN867XF+SnsC7vj2TQww2m-CUs9YuQ@mail.gmail.com> <3125FCC8-F68D-418F-920D-8FBE5D34C840@fugue.com> <A7E71D2A-33CE-4869-B51F-5D345D118E37@gmail.com> <20170406124635.0fb20504@echo.ms.redpill-linpro.com> <CAOSSMjUPRSvEmx6KGLGLZwZbMLYVYsG-ik1w4N1q4RHcZHt6=w@mail.gmail.com> <CAAedzxqP98efWiEh4fcNeRvzUuaUvH+O-pf6322gQ+HJ40pBRg@mail.gmail.com> <20170406183800.3e4f5ef4@envy.e1.y.home> <CAKD1Yr3+YBvNMHPns8R=tv7Wa=zg2xSF5VG6ibuSmmOZLaFYUQ@mail.gmail.com> <20170406184840.524adb1c@envy.e1.y.home> <CAKD1Yr3HUeSNLkNCZLRV2s01zkwS1W2kWM3hrjS4D7K6HozAEw@mail.gmail.com> <1083adcc-06a2-8096-2724-a9774245e357@si6networks.com> <CAPt1N1n 4T0dZ4yk0bNCtqgzc4-uBzHQum46KAUz0q+s6OGc95Q@mail.gmail.com> <m1cwTJC-0000GyC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <CAPt1N1=PhFVmhiATR+a_20c8M_Lu3_y-XN-wL_Gtz5pAVqvWZA@mail.gmail.com> <m1cwTP5-0000HHC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <CAPt1N1mNCY4ROEq36isMgMO4iCpQFj=070YRuU0iwBgRZtKu=A@mail.gmail.com> <m1cwTmN-0000ISC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
In-Reply-To: <m1cwTmN-0000ISC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.70.161.166]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-RSA-Inspected: yes
X-RSA-Classifications: public
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-04-07_12:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1702020001 definitions=main-1704070114
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/1j3ovoQatZlqDxCwLsTYZyAvDQ0>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Making RDNSS a MUST?, hum v2
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Fri, 07 Apr 2017 13:36:42 -0000

> I'd say that for routers, a MUST for RDNSS should be paired with a MUST for
> DHCP relay and a SHOULD for DHCP stateless server.
> 
> I'm not aware of routers that do not have the resources for a DHCP relay.
> I.e., constrained devices tend to be hosts. If someone has a contrained
> device that is a router, then a SHOULD for DHCP relay makes sense.
> 
> I have not heard any technical objection to a DHCP stateless server that is off
> by default.
> 
> Likewise, if you have a configuration mechanism for RDNSS then the same
> can be used for DHCP stateless. If the stateless DHCP server is off by default
> it cannot do any harm.
> 
> But I'm sure that if rough concensus can be declared that at least DHCP relay
> is at least a SHOULD, then we should be able to sort out other details.

For enterprise routers (newly adopted draft-ali-ipv6rtr-reqs), yes. But leave my CE routers out of it. I'm not adding DHCPv6 Relay to my routers with built-in DSL or G.fast modems. The access network expects DHCPv6 messages to come from the 802.1x-authenticated device. Not through it.
And leave tethering routers out of it, too. 3GPP wireless providers aren't asking for relayed DHCPv6 messages to be coming into the 3GPP wireless network.
Focus on the enterprise routers. Those ar the operators asking for v6ops help.
Barbara

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email