Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-dhc-pd-exclude

jouni korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> Thu, 08 December 2011 19:32 UTC

Return-Path: <jouni.nospam@gmail.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 DC68621F8ACE for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Dec 2011 11:32:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.556
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.556 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.043, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ax+eIg-tbkOn for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Dec 2011 11:32:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com [209.85.215.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14E9921F8AB0 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Dec 2011 11:32:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: by laah2 with SMTP id h2so92190laa.31 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 08 Dec 2011 11:32:16 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=eV2Bt181MdN95CwKfVkfLiDGek4eLHSVsCb8e4XxIOE=; b=rkJgS81ZvfBy7ZUeGZEeiHZQM/YfquLSGZwUh1L8ImUc3B/nvvPoNI7849s7y65pRF /1MxdRB9l5qwdY7E4/fYWjeKLGfDo2I8Q3H3OzICRWCLKnxy/FnbKJwUPbrmozDmCcY9 JGznJUQVApXP2PCn0D8zChsNvKVXKEWEnyC7w=
Received: by 10.152.135.225 with SMTP id pv1mr2844820lab.19.1323372735961; Thu, 08 Dec 2011 11:32:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [188.117.15.108] ([188.117.15.108]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ng10sm5392904lab.13.2011.12.08.11.32.13 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 08 Dec 2011 11:32:14 -0800 (PST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
From: jouni korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <5B6B2B64C9FE2A489045EEEADDAFF2C303778FAA@XMB-RCD-109.cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2011 21:32:09 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2AC8BBFA-E7C7-480D-8658-2D92DFD6AFC2@gmail.com>
References: <5B6B2B64C9FE2A489045EEEADDAFF2C3037785BB@XMB-RCD-109.cisco.com> <D015FA6A-DBD9-4959-82F9-B23DCCE8FFA2@gmail.com> <5B6B2B64C9FE2A489045EEEADDAFF2C303778FAA@XMB-RCD-109.cisco.com>
To: Hemant Singh <shemant@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>, Ray Hunter <v6ops@globis.net>, v6ops@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-dhc-pd-exclude
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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, 08 Dec 2011 19:32:18 -0000

Hemant,

On Dec 7, 2011, at 3:40 PM, Hemant Singh (shemant) wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: jouni korhonen [mailto:jouni.nospam@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2011 1:59 AM
> Cc: Ray Hunter; Ted Lemon; Thomas Narten; v6ops@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-dhc-pd-exclude
>  
>  
> > setup on the DR that is sending an RA with one exclude prefix if the DR has 20K different IPV6 CE routers  as RR’s?  The RA >is multicast and, say, reaches 40K CE routers.   How is the exclude prefix working with the multicast RA?

This would work assuming you then include the pd-exclude only to that single IA_PD that is aggregate of the prefix on the link. The rest of the 19999 RRs' IA_PDs do not need pd-exclude for the prefix.

I setup my home network to mimic a deployment like this just to verify it worked.. i.e. my 'DR' had a Pref::/56 route to 'CE' A. The link where the rest of the routers B etc were, all configure their 'WAN' using SLAAC from Pref::/64 (the excluded prefix).

I think it could be useful to explain this case in pd-exclude draft how and why it actually works according to the conceptual sending algorithm in RFC4861.

- JOuni

>  
> >Is this a real deployment scenario you are designing or already having where you intend to use pd-exclude? My question >regarding this specific example is why you would use RAs & SLAAC to configure 40K CE routers' WAN links attached to a single >link (with one prefix) and then try to apply pd-exclude in the first place?
>  
> I do have a cable deployment where I can have the access concentrator serving 100K PD clients.  The network would like to use the pd-exclude.  The reason I asked my question because one person already said, the DR can use the RA so that the DR can address it’s interface with SLAAC.  There are two choices for such a deployment and that is why I asked the question.  Either the same exclude /64 is given to each of the 100K clients or the network uses unicast RA.  Some IETF document has already defined a unicast.
>  
> Hemant
>