Re: [v6ops] [GROW] Deaggregation by large organizations

Gert Doering <gert@space.net> Thu, 23 October 2014 08:41 UTC

Return-Path: <gert@Space.Net>
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 924071A892C for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 01:41:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.79
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.79 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 BmixT3Bsqnrp for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 01:41:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mobil.space.net (mobil.space.net [IPv6:2001:608:2:81::67]) (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 39DEC1A8924 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 01:41:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietf.org
Received: from mobil.space.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1E8360798 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 10:41:32 +0200 (CEST)
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
Received: from moebius3.space.net (moebius3.Space.Net [IPv6:2001:608:2:2::250]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D97660140 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 10:41:32 +0200 (CEST)
Received: (qmail 10150 invoked by uid 1007); 23 Oct 2014 10:41:32 +0200
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 10:41:32 +0200
From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
To: Matthew Petach <mpetach@netflight.com>
Message-ID: <20141023084132.GE31092@Space.Net>
References: <F5C06CAF-0AD2-4225-8EE7-FC72CE9913F0@muada.com> <755DE4C3-CDDF-41AF-BA9C-E8EC5B4DFC4C@muada.com> <A7F6BEA0-BCDD-4197-B6CB-7EB8797ACA9C@delong.com> <20141016233533.1B73521A106C@rock.dv.isc.org> <CAEmG1=r7UdeStcqFjiQRO_Vt1hfR_T4oyTW5FD-eD1ATEXpc6A@mail.gmail.com> <20141017010552.9682921A4D54@rock.dv.isc.org> <CAEmG1=qi2YcBrMC8__32PFPzD6OfycTbJqeV9g_WbOs7+T14gA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAEmG1=qi2YcBrMC8__32PFPzD6OfycTbJqeV9g_WbOs7+T14gA@mail.gmail.com>
X-NCC-RegID: de.space
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/2mmb8Oz7Vd2jfl0bAbHsmwUPM7w
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org, grow@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v6ops] [GROW] Deaggregation by large organizations
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 23 Oct 2014 08:41:37 -0000

Hi,

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 06:18:34PM -0700, Matthew Petach wrote:
> The probability of us figuring out how to scale
> the routing table to handle 40 billion prefixes
> is orders of magnitude more likely than solving
> the headaches associated with dynamic host
> renumbering.  That ship has done gone and
> sailed, hit the proverbial iceberg, and is gathering
> barnacles at the bottom of the ocean.

What I find scary in this statement is the underlying "one solution must
fit all users" mentality.

I can fully see and understand Owen's point that in an *enterprise*
environment, renumbering is truly hard, because you need to get lots of
other people that have no real interest to renumber stuff in their config
files - and yes, vendors of <whatever> that could handle DNS lookups and
combinations of "get prefix from DNS, attach <localbit>, put result into
usage" would be truly nice, but indeed, that should have been specced
15 years ago to be available now (maybe).

OTOH, there's the large mass of SOHO style users, where "dynamic host
renumbering" *really* is a non-issue.  I've gone there and tested it
in a homenet testbed with two IPv6 uplinks, so multi-homing and 
src-based routing thrown in - it works.  It needs polishing and some
IETF work here and there (SAS failover comes to mind, and labels-to-
prefixes) but it works better than "IPv4 with two providers" today,
for that particular class of users.

PI(-ish) "for everybody" is just not the right solution for non-technical-
savy users that would just not know that these funny numbers they received
from one of their providers are relevant, and lose them - thus, when changing
providers, would get new ones anyway.  And what do they need static addresses
for, anyway, as long as some sort of "register and lookup" mechanism exist
(mDNS, DNS, SIP, ...) to find the address when needed?

No, Owen's home does not qualify for a typical "SOHO" network, and most
likely, none of the other readers.  Ask yourself, what is needed to make
the network on your parent's home work (assuming those are not network
engineers).

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444           USt-IdNr.: DE813185279