IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] IPv6-Only Preferred DHCPv4 option

Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> Fri, 06 December 2019 10:37 UTC

Return-Path: <lorenzo@google.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 15E101200F5 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Dec 2019 02:37:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -17.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 5jpYjWDgpvYE for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Dec 2019 02:37:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-il1-x12d.google.com (mail-il1-x12d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12d]) (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 9670A1200F1 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Dec 2019 02:37:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-il1-x12d.google.com with SMTP id z12so5808935iln.11 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 06 Dec 2019 02:37:29 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=j3CH4kWWyK/TBw/U9RyjDEZxCYrZMkshh75M/ynGF5I=; b=HiAOIRrz2gYYJSlBRp6s0hK+/czGfgxjqX7sFK7OfgBkFeDhG30M0xBD9ZHrzie8nt T5r23exmClyqtVb7snhkhzAtQcVH4JujmKU3oSPNDAQdobPFQIcItcNAcaXfX4LyMc6g PnLhEI+eQG6Ci9Ph3AdMydyrdq5ZiegnUx3g/UUmuZzT88uOYlGY5Fp50V+cCBfH0nRB jz84ZqJGvDrAwD2Ax2azGmP48qipP3F5A+h/Z3nBJyqEGo+Q0CYZxiiI0QkeOCccDw99 sMZFUku1W9/QKLSzg8K0Npx3qwtOdEefs6AmqHbQ038R+kzoKrm+D5LTfVRwT334hu+2 qXyQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=j3CH4kWWyK/TBw/U9RyjDEZxCYrZMkshh75M/ynGF5I=; b=jBybPtnCubAjA33yAHme/ll7CitYVjgeWGn6Y17Vjpdrc8pkAgk5bmRYOlnEqgXkTN yuBA2LiFB8CfK49WRgTFsFd1LU++UfiMMOGeQuxFQnmL5rbJdouB4JdXbLSkZN+8Galm iWeFjw0Vbsco/rlZemWo4EayG32ubTZzCJy+6aGFlniWluDCAC5IsZKo+osxW5UWfNwT XhP98OrByBdMkWep9yhK5XAkq3mFcb2f7scna+Ejp+i4DpImBt4juwwalu4rPf+aRZPz Nfc/UY84nJfhZ83jjDPNiKfWoAeodFWNrQ+/kkvo4RnQ3VbgU6taPzlY6qaNUIDcJOGT Fl8Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAW1KUJicIn0Ht2zNq5GVJmgWChVFGGAbuTcRQ3+h6vs/q3L8DZg +lN17Hs1z/JbnXRQKRCkCuL4eFVNrRi92tz1K0nJpF+qSk3LPg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwS+Ul0zwPhnKihf78ZgV2X/9/F/3YoqvxIMwTfEqqmdoLXc6VJBawp9dZoaQx67YKlwNyjcMA6TeUedLUV23Y=
X-Received: by 2002:a92:6e09:: with SMTP id j9mr11029019ilc.178.1575628648668; Fri, 06 Dec 2019 02:37:28 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAFU7BAR1JLUZps=CAqJfeQtUf-xQ88RYvgYrPCP+QP0Ter7YFg@mail.gmail.com> <E03BBE6C-3BED-4D49-8F79-0A1B313EFD9D@apple.com> <28594.1575483729@localhost> <7ac18a46-31d9-74cc-117a-0fd908413aac@gmail.com> <m1icmif-0000JrC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <CAFU7BAThtF=Fio_CZFPA+0D7GBZbzpgXMQ5kBiSK5XKi29vkJw@mail.gmail.com> <m1idAT1-0000L9C@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
In-Reply-To: <m1idAT1-0000L9C@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2019 19:37:16 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKD1Yr2qC3tWSH-yi4e2on79-UYzv7vYmWsb7Vh66R4zbm+k2A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Philip Homburg <pch-v6ops-9@u-1.phicoh.com>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e764c9059906a1d8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/7JhouOpz_bxP2lpBBx2EFol-K-4>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] IPv6-Only Preferred DHCPv4 option
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, 06 Dec 2019 10:37:31 -0000

On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 7:04 PM Philip Homburg <pch-v6ops-9@u-1.phicoh.com>
wrote:

> >I'm an operator who could not wait to implement that draft (and I'm
> >aware of at least one other operator who might be interested).
> >Maybe I'm not creative enough but all other options of incremental
> >deployment of IPv6-only I've come up with are much more ugly
> >(doubling the number of SSIDs/VLANs or having a portal when users have to
> >request IPv4 so their MACs are whitelisted etc).
>
> Can you describe why offering both NAT64 and native IPv4 on the same lan
> doesn't work?
>

It uses lots of IPv4 addresses. Additionally, many hosts prefer native IPv4
over IPv6+NAT64, so they will keep DHCP running even if they get IPv6 with
NAT64. Even if the hosts changed this behaviour, hosts typically start IPv4
immediately when they connect. Because IPv6 provisioning is often slower
than IPv4, the host will get an IPv4 address first. And once it gets an
IPv4 address it generally doesn't want to release it later because doing so
could disrupt application sockets.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email