Re: [v6ops] DHCPv6/SLAAC Make Hosts Confusing-//RE: new draft: draft-liu-bonica-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem

Andrew Yourtchenko <ayourtch@cisco.com> Tue, 29 October 2013 20:21 UTC

Return-Path: <ayourtch@cisco.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 1470C11E82C5 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 13:21:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.374
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.374 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.225, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 0sTX+XV5oFQn for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 13:21:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 695FD11E82B7 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 13:20:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1309; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1383078057; x=1384287657; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id: references:mime-version; bh=BnOwo5U1vNUcAhJ9tmZAFBSnXYFRWvpOdspB3M+DBT4=; b=fyHjYgS0w0qa/ruvaBHT/iqRZG1Z4AJKWVtAOPLyAnRf7A5K/JY864rP KSBPcYD0jnSf66zrbN+81Cglmo6jv8hrrkhz/9IMFH4Y46Zz7IHOXfH9w IXaYNPiwrUu+kZi2NIm6XohM5eHJvVdjtiS+viI93tP9Ky5IWmzSgNLlh g=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AroHAHAYcFKtJXG9/2dsb2JhbABZgwc4VL58OYEtFnSCJQEBAQMBOAI/BQsLGCMLVwYOBYgBBg26OQSPQQeELAOeRotMgWiBP4Ip
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,595,1378857600"; d="scan'208";a="278173444"
Received: from rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com ([173.37.113.189]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 29 Oct 2013 20:20:57 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x04.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x04.cisco.com [173.37.183.78]) by rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r9TKKuLH020357 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 29 Oct 2013 20:20:56 GMT
Received: from [10.61.200.140] (10.61.200.140) by xhc-rcd-x04.cisco.com (173.37.183.78) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.318.4; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 15:20:56 -0500
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 21:20:37 +0100
From: Andrew Yourtchenko <ayourtch@cisco.com>
X-X-Sender: ayourtch@ayourtch-mac
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr1myWu7BUmcP3sJqPXFtRyGhy=Qqd2yMsYBFQjPce3GUA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.00.1310292040510.31066@ayourtch-mac>
References: <CE8E8EC3.59F3A%victor@jvknet.com> <06601039-CAFD-49B0-918B-A8ACD51B978D@fugue.com> <alpine.OSX.2.00.1310281905440.11422@ayourtch-mac> <CAKD1Yr0qLd7syFizEUMa6DM2a2LY6Rv5GSFyoQAs4Pir6gcNkA@mail.gmail.com> <1383036443.56704.YahooMailNeo@web142501.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <alpine.OSX.2.00.1310291443480.31066@ayourtch-mac> <1383074208.73179.YahooMailNeo@web142505.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <alpine.OSX.2.00.1310292030450.31066@ayourtch-mac> <CAKD1Yr1myWu7BUmcP3sJqPXFtRyGhy=Qqd2yMsYBFQjPce3GUA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (OSX 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format=flowed
X-Originating-IP: [10.61.200.140]
Cc: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>, "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com>, "Ole Troan \(otroan\)" <otroan@cisco.com>, "draft-liu-bonica-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem@tools.ietf.org" <draft-liu-bonica-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] DHCPv6/SLAAC Make Hosts Confusing-//RE: new draft: draft-liu-bonica-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem
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: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 20:21:08 -0000

On Wed, 30 Oct 2013, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 4:33 AM, Andrew Yourtchenko <ayourtch@cisco.com> wrote:
>       Essence of that section: RA deals with routing [not always very efficently]. DHCPv6 does not do it at all.
> 
> 
> I think the words you want are that RA "shares fate" with routing, right?

I don't think "shares fate" is the correct wording for it - but maybe I 
misunderstand what you meant. Please expand.

Meantime I tried to reword that section: 
https://github.com/ayourtch/ra-dhcpv6/blob/0bfbfd0f3c69de9b0c208aa1b7933ab6cc71be30/draft-yourtchenko-ra-dhcpv6-comparison-00.txt#L230

Take a look and see if this captures the things any better.

It's a very tricky section. There's an intertwine of "DHCPv6 was not 
allowed to do any routing" + the implicit "I got an RA therefore that 
router exists" (though "I got a DHCP offer from that router therefore that 
router exists" is also can be argued for) + the "multiple sources of 
truths"...  I feel it turns into a micro-version of the "RA vs. DHCP" 
debate - maybe worth just folding it back into a pure factual "It was 
decided that RA does routing, DHCPv6 does not, by the way RA does a slow 
redundancy, which people do not like, therefore they think DHCPv6 should 
do routing".

--a