Re: [v6ops] [EXTERNAL] Re: Scope of Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses (Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gont-6man-ipv6-ula-scope-00.txt)

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Tue, 16 February 2021 23:11 UTC

Return-Path: <fgont@si6networks.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 2BC453A12AC for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 15:11:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 Vl2se6C0azfy for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 15:11:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fgont.go6lab.si (fgont.go6lab.si [91.239.96.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D62B63A127D for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 15:11:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2800:810:464:2b9:45cd:4b14:c31b:4847] (unknown [IPv6:2800:810:464:2b9:45cd:4b14:c31b:4847]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by fgont.go6lab.si (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B0FE128018C; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 23:11:20 +0000 (UTC)
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, v6ops@ietf.org
References: <98707BCB-C0BF-434A-B6F2-70CE20418CDD@fugue.com> <7EE1DA6D-0751-48FF-8238-FFEE15CE891E@gmail.com> <6167230f-b32a-e995-c071-b6c199ac5d64@si6networks.com> <858465C5-F428-4B47-8549-FCC201143B0C@fugue.com> <6959c883-a255-5ab8-9027-e05d369af2ff@si6networks.com> <m1lC29B-0000MuC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <YCvkYXwTrSdQoe8Q@Space.Net> <F63054D3-59D0-47FA-AABF-98A18B8DFA6F@fugue.com> <YCvsVVkQc5zDJQVh@Space.Net> <D084D80B-66A3-4132-B111-31FC6A61A969@fugue.com> <YCvw1DC/eOKmoEYc@Space.Net> <m1lC3J8-0000JNC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <23F41A82-766A-49F6-BA03-9E7665FF8197@fugue.com> <5c54cfe9-9535-f0ef-ee37-e20f174d66ed@gmail.com>
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Message-ID: <94064a0b-ecb3-0220-e8fb-5232dc64c02c@si6networks.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 20:11:07 -0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5c54cfe9-9535-f0ef-ee37-e20f174d66ed@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/2hxEJ9QxFDilsgjUw1nKNiRrbr8>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] [EXTERNAL] Re: Scope of Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses (Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gont-6man-ipv6-ula-scope-00.txt)
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 23:11:31 -0000

On 16/2/21 19:40, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 17-Feb-21 05:52, Ted Lemon wrote:
>> On Feb 16, 2021, at 11:34 AM, Philip Homburg <pch-v6ops-10@u-1.phicoh.com <mailto:pch-v6ops-10@u-1.phicoh.com>> wrote:
[...]
>>
>> But I’m curious, has anybody tried to get Linux to adopt RFC 8028? It seems like a pretty easy sell—the behavior without 8028 is clearly wrong.
>>
> 
> The IETF is not good at this sort of thing (working with the
> developer community). But see RFC 8504 (node requirements):
> 
> "Hosts that may be deployed in such multihomed environments SHOULD
>   follow the guidance given in [RFC8028]."
> 
> so this ought to show up on the conformance radar.

I must say that, in retrospective, this should have been a MUST. THings 
do break without RFC8028.

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492