IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] SLAAC renum: Problem Statement & Operational workarounds

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Fri, 25 October 2019 17:59 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.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 3A1CD1208BE for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 10:59:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 Pk7srn_gjXSv for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 10:59:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk1-x732.google.com (mail-qk1-x732.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::732]) (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 3B5791200D7 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 10:59:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk1-x732.google.com with SMTP id u184so2568152qkd.4 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 10:59:15 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=T9aS1ZVWmpN6S/KUS9MGNSCvWVDTFVAhfbKM0imEBz8=; b=fcUzLhnwAMR6HeWlR7rJi23AWVsqQvUQ/9rAOzwe+JG389UWgZuoR8l3Zr5WCvMkUN 1Y+AF1BNocympv/JVpjDgbVKJXX+8q15xUWCat7ELitAcZH/1/olO1HljkAc9YLvO1OG 0/ofiVZyLFCOr6z2eN93nV1VdjBuRgsQsU8C0dQlJ+AFJziJpkI2fJFoE9/Nvp7LAwOK FgNvRydDh9iIVysXGDltl7L5J/rWU2zXKpPgqqjxNzlelLOIH6V7C40g4ZsoPEVVL45s DW7YYejvb9KZKlqpKKbpGa3zmC1/E5iK1ZaXmR4n+sgRfwQ1greyK3rip5DCSzrE25M6 Y0gg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=T9aS1ZVWmpN6S/KUS9MGNSCvWVDTFVAhfbKM0imEBz8=; b=MRf+ql7Eczqy8H5r+4PcTqjtv6O2HFGvQSTky0iDXE4Z0Ht3U3733qfsowGyKejeKO r6hAAIDWXS++rwL6SnBjngd2ZVXefWSuncw9RX/mHFsabgWztqCDjwYahXxqhwAWn7m2 GEYFq/ftD+oYHmcESaTh++IAD7b3v7td2akBz9NROkcxIp/c1H5twEWZaIOv8lI5T6G5 3lOUu/5l70gyGo/LOiVubjAsnPD+a3yU8EhL17O5wLPsz2YKlATwERb//vtLQeVz90xZ Pd6+VuyJo7G9rrmChx+rpMWGrnOvoAepVsb1yNSJCET+XIoF0Vt8ypG+Y/3+q54eJ3pO AtCA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUUFNweC3J6rauRIKM7T1Atyujmzib2N4gV7Ss75wQAzEr898Oq IJIS1MBKX3Dz2tNMeNNDd85Cps4Wz+YOWA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqy8MKZ9CB8ZfYW4/TzF1brRx5OYRr54YXPnhGtKPxiQJB25ugbsHQCKVz5fDIZIXDI88IZ8mA==
X-Received: by 2002:a37:bd5:: with SMTP id 204mr3885032qkl.137.1572026354254; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 10:59:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:18b:300:36ee:f9e1:cec4:6cf2:e2c1? ([2601:18b:300:36ee:f9e1:cec4:6cf2:e2c1]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u18sm2875655qth.20.2019.10.25.10.59.13 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 25 Oct 2019 10:59:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Message-Id: <4C2352ED-4B3A-4F11-B860-FE0848513431@fugue.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_F7BEF4FF-75B7-4FA3-B5B6-3A862AAD2FD3"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3601.0.4\))
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2019 13:59:11 -0400
In-Reply-To: <1a07be3c-90bb-5182-1a11-5e94fbbacf44@si6networks.com>
Cc: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>, v6ops list <v6ops@ietf.org>
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
References: <860c946a-c23c-4060-d83c-587302de28f8@si6networks.com> <5A20C8D8-3A42-464D-9D6D-79F1567B6FA4@employees.org> <1a07be3c-90bb-5182-1a11-5e94fbbacf44@si6networks.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3601.0.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/4Byi9pPXMLNsXP4oPOVR47v-VPA>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] SLAAC renum: Problem Statement & Operational workarounds
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: Fri, 25 Oct 2019 17:59:18 -0000

On Oct 25, 2019, at 1:52 PM, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> wrote:
> The "flash renumbering" could also happen if the CPE was trying to kind
> of the right thing, the ISP does not employ stable prefixes, and the CPE
> happens to crash and reboot. Some CPEs also reportedly do a "release"
> when rebooted.

That’s probably a bug.   If the CPE has a valid lease, and the prefix is still working, it should continue to advertise it until its valid lifetime expires.   The ISP DHCP server should be giving the router two prefixes if it’s being renumbered: the preferred one, and the one that’s still valid but not preferred anymore.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email