Re: [v6ops] Interesting problems with using IPv6

Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> Tue, 09 September 2014 10:13 UTC

Return-Path: <nick@foobar.org>
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 878A41A02BE for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Sep 2014 03:13:13 -0700 (PDT)
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] 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 B6ZGJXu5tB9H for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Sep 2014 03:13:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.netability.ie (mail.netability.ie [IPv6:2a03:8900:0:100::5]) (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 C41BD1A00C5 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Sep 2014 03:13:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Envelope-To: v6ops@ietf.org
Received: from vpn-251.int.inex.ie (vpn-251.int.inex.ie [193.242.111.251]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.netability.ie (8.14.9/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s89ACeaI054854 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 9 Sep 2014 11:13:01 +0100 (IST) (envelope-from nick@foobar.org)
Message-ID: <540ED29A.8050005@foobar.org>
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2014 11:12:42 +0100
From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tore Anderson <tore@fud.no>, Mark ZZZ Smith <markzzzsmith@yahoo.com.au>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, "Dale W. Carder" <dwcarder@wisc.edu>
References: <1410082125488.85722@surrey.ac.uk> <540CB702.3000605@gmail.com> <20140908183339.GB98785@ricotta.doit.wisc.edu> <540E26D9.3070907@gmail.com> <1410227735.13436.YahooMailNeo@web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <540ECB9E.9000102@foobar.org> <540ECDD8.9040901@fud.no>
In-Reply-To: <540ECDD8.9040901@fud.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/6S3ZLHuvi-V4KckmaUONbZhksKs
Cc: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>, "l.wood@surrey.ac.uk" <l.wood@surrey.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Interesting problems with using IPv6
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: Tue, 09 Sep 2014 10:13:13 -0000

On 09/09/2014 10:52, Tore Anderson wrote:
> That's easily accomplished by setting Autonomous=0 in RA and using
> something else for address assignment (like DHCPv6).
>
> No SLAAC => no privacy extensions.

yes, this was what they decided: that SLAAC would not work on their 
configuration and that if they were going to enable ipv6 in the future, it 
would probably be on the basis of dhcpv6, with no autoconfiguration.

Nick