Re: [v6ops] Turning on IPv6 Routers

Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 20 July 2017 15:33 UTC

Return-Path: <fredbaker.ietf@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 78C84126CB6; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 08:33:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 aDfmOvkQKHdW; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 08:33:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x243.google.com (mail-wm0-x243.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::243]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F198E128BC8; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 08:33:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x243.google.com with SMTP id 184so1396377wmo.3; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 08:33:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=ZydrDn7HXvtuZTSsoacZiGNWZ/7i9WFpKhKzZ2482Gg=; b=Wx2MKYVvGrDmKpcEg7GJE8dKmofIy1rv7Rrq9YSoZIwW0IJ6wVw1x7Xe0dFJn96Whv SbQ/llETC7mk01uXiMAtzWr3477rNsTu5KgeF6BnXaOQApx5hYdlf66wDKr18rmCDxDX 5vfLNxnNI3JmO7cvS96e4E2xfmEzawdA0+OYfL6i23I3wIjaeTXflYH1EtJkY/02cimR dvJgX1VvfVy84T6QQ72QgyPQNBZbl+Rq2UG4NMja4KJFmZEQrsuM5qvjC85CtOzMI4+Y e62jfVd4u5Lsjs4Ev7KG24/AU96BzuxgA6CB722kP5+a38SI5rt1FxRmiCGQsBP9glhY Q/bg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=ZydrDn7HXvtuZTSsoacZiGNWZ/7i9WFpKhKzZ2482Gg=; b=dfOlL1YkQ7mP4K46qs7LZWjcaicTjtWDpFP6VuNLkKUBMPqfad1Q0ySb40Pwxhh58e lPUPaNmOarPmFSI98vnBR8oDh9zCIo1ytXYIWCfuW5/D8Qgkjut9AFf1GHkFky+EY0or 6H/NpbWrIP/Owlc/Kl6LgWB4MisOvTKSW6efp6Pxp6Ehx2mjCZtb5q82K5E0yBFgPgMh hKnjS4PpmIny/1TlFsSXd2iXC3iYGF32r+bIIoPyLxI+tqJWTg3KiFYgZAKZC5C1qADJ Lq0EcRS8Me/YJaAL1UYnSXLQDkNXSqzx2nsGjxxkGuV0gLTKyU+OolrIt5L99D7fOtrj SrDQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw11015V5SDXKsl6pUTI5OMK9Pjvjy7v+Nz9NjX6EB+Vl0TvBhY3g2 OxPTrLfcisZzhg==
X-Received: by 10.28.165.207 with SMTP id o198mr2683008wme.154.1500564815530; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 08:33:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:67c:1232:144:cd1:34c:a97d:4a84? ([2001:67c:1232:144:cd1:34c:a97d:4a84]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 46sm8594158wrz.8.2017.07.20.08.33.34 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 20 Jul 2017 08:33:34 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.0 \(3439\))
From: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <E80CAF36-0E2B-482F-834B-EAF93CBF6AF6@jisc.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 17:33:33 +0200
Cc: "draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis@ietf.org>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, IPv6 Ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <C2E97C87-7E7B-4B43-8A83-DDEFE791E513@gmail.com>
References: <28757A47-53D8-459E-B76D-D5D5DE3D5897@gmail.com> <E80CAF36-0E2B-482F-834B-EAF93CBF6AF6@jisc.ac.uk>
To: Tim Chown <Tim.Chown@jisc.ac.uk>, draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6rtr-reqs@ietf.org, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3439)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/3pkGpmItmvOvSii063zUVLFQPcU>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Turning on IPv6 Routers
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: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 15:33:40 -0000

I'd guess 7084bis before one targeting big iron, but yes in concept.

> On Jul 20, 2017, at 4:53 PM, Tim Chown <Tim.Chown@jisc.ac.uk> wrote:
> 
> Hi Fred,
> 
>> On 20 Jul 2017, at 15:22, Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> I write as co-chair of v6ops, under our charter element "comment to other working groups when it seems appropriate". 
>> 
>> One outcome from at least v6ops and I think a couple of other WGs and RGs this week - may I suggest a change to Node Requirements and a corresponding change to the IPv6 Ready Logo?
>> 
>> General Category: "Good grief, it's 2017 for goodness' sake!"
>> 
>> Something that would be helpful in IPv6 deployment would be to turn IPv6 on by default in residential routers. Note that this is not the general case. I can think of routers, whose vendors have C's and J's, and probably H's, in their names, whose default configuration is as an Internet Host. The following would apply to devices that are configured by default as an IP router with routing enabled.
>> 
>> Please add a requirement of the general form:
>> 
>> "If IPv4 router operation is enabled by default, enable IPv6 router operation by default."
>> 
>> Note that this is not as simple as it might sound. There are at least three configurations that must be allowed for upstream: bridging the ISP downstream and CPE downstream LANs, Address allocation via DHCP IA_NA, and address allocation via SLAAC, and on the CPE downstream LAN(s), address allocation via DHCP IA_NA and SLAAC. BBF TR-124 gives a flowchart for this or RFC 7084 defines the algorithms. The implementation is going to have to enable all three, see which works, and act accordingly.
>> 
>> There may also be considerations for PPPOE: if IPv4 is configured for PPPOE, turn it on for IPv6.
>> 
>> Good Grief. This is 2017 for goodness' sake, and there are implementations that turn IPv6 on by default and work. Do it. Just do it.
> 
> Noted for 6434-bis, and we’ll draft some words, though 6434-bis is more generally aimed at hosts, for which I think a similar statement should apply, though this is far more common practice.
> 
> Similar text should be applied to draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6rtr-reqs-00.
> 
> Tim
>