IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-ra-unicast

"Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)" <sgundave@cisco.com> Mon, 20 July 2015 20:34 UTC

Return-Path: <sgundave@cisco.com>
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 1435E1B31B9 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Jul 2015 13:34:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.51
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 WM_LzNCjhvyM for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Jul 2015 13:34:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-1.cisco.com (alln-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.142.88]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 74A1B1B31A9 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Jul 2015 13:34:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5005; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1437424458; x=1438634058; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=jBYlC7l4xClgPfURoRKicTbnbOxsxwn4T8bcDxhmjEs=; b=ZNuIZlQ5elxZa9TfKPRi9+Vc2wb+MZwUX4xHAsdlliwiNaKGRhmvAW4D KsaPa8l8xosHvS+uvF1c2przBvpMPkLOZ0C4FhS8XG2N8KKp0zbvIwPPO nBr5bdD+9Cge+GN2UJL3Vcurg8Pm47EZ66Qc/Ma4Db9qiFXZdk73A/kBQ Y=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AcAwDcWa1V/4sNJK1cgkZNgT0Gu2gJh3YCgTA4FAEBAQEBAQGBCoQjAQEBBHkQAgEIBA0DAQIoBzIUCQgCBAENBYguyRABAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEXi0yEdREHhCsFlFIBjCCBQ5Njg2Emgg0cgVNvgUeBBAEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,510,1432598400"; d="scan'208,217";a="170666394"
Received: from alln-core-6.cisco.com ([173.36.13.139]) by alln-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 20 Jul 2015 20:34:17 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x04.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x04.cisco.com [173.36.12.78]) by alln-core-6.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t6KKYHOI024385 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 20 Jul 2015 20:34:17 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x03.cisco.com ([169.254.6.38]) by xhc-aln-x04.cisco.com ([173.36.12.78]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Mon, 20 Jul 2015 15:34:17 -0500
From: "Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)" <sgundave@cisco.com>
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>, Erik Kline <ek@google.com>
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-ra-unicast
Thread-Index: AQHQwwoRV5WE5H8C40euPLXoQlwU+53k6fMAgAADxQD//8GNgA==
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 20:34:16 +0000
Message-ID: <D1D2A832.1B7D8F%sgundave@cisco.com>
References: <201507071147.t67Bl13m009348@irp-lnx1.cisco.com> <CAO42Z2x7mNFbB_w_+W+80pY+LeCAKXaOBXMmQvkcaMSWhwW60g@mail.gmail.com> <EF21B630-5D0A-415A-A93F-9058900CC80C@cisco.com> <CAO42Z2zAqMXhBZ2wa=q0wtHGhMpMWU9TSjfFyd2quiki9w0oSw@mail.gmail.com> <85CADAA2-8DF2-4A6B-812B-7A77081936F5@cisco.com> <CAO42Z2w3fOxGJHasKqYZRfGZ2u=7FnZBm+jgLtgDvfZ7HYW=iw@mail.gmail.com> <CAO42Z2z+DwOin23HQTysrZ9dNP924+LQ-vOExmJc_xZUEB4yCQ@mail.gmail.com> <228248C6-94FE-4C9C-A875-F732EFDC6601@cisco.com> <CAAedzxqapiWuy4Gk5t3zEe3XmaLyRc3nc5=aA1ED0tzfeXckbA@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr3Hn9qJTaM0v3+hr7NfQbLc=mOWYGwrTK-XXxKp5v+dpg@mail.gmail.com> <CAAedzxpdFsCy2Y7U0gFmQeHEvJjNj-243g_ffoJsVUeRz5RpZw@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr1uR+HyBTB=Yhy5hGs1Z6Wv=HT3wwFgLYDosDJ7a78-PA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr1uR+HyBTB=Yhy5hGs1Z6Wv=HT3wwFgLYDosDJ7a78-PA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.1.150515
x-originating-ip: [10.24.133.228]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D1D2A8321B7D8Fsgundaveciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/8kRNMWL_hL-1jzlkVHiz-Vq-xdg>
Cc: "draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-ra-unicast@tools.ietf.org" <draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-ra-unicast@tools.ietf.org>, v6ops list <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-ra-unicast
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: <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: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 20:34:21 -0000

Did you guys look at RFC-6085 ? We published this clarification mainly to support per-MN prefix model on shared links, by the use of L2 unicast RA's. Is that not sufficient ?




From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com<mailto:lorenzo@google.com>>
Date: Monday, July 20, 2015 10:17 AM
To: Erik Kline <ek@google.com<mailto:ek@google.com>>
Cc: "draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-ra-unicast@tools.ietf.org<mailto:draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-ra-unicast@tools.ietf.org>" <draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-ra-unicast@tools.ietf.org<mailto:draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-ra-unicast@tools.ietf.org>>, v6ops list <v6ops@ietf.org<mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-ra-unicast

On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 7:04 PM, Erik Kline <ek@google.com<mailto:ek@google.com>> wrote:
Yes, and these routers exist.  The M2M stuff I scanned in 3GPP has
nodes that sleep on a schedule and the network knows when they're
supposed to wake up (and they have to wake up periodically if only to
sync their clocks with the network).

That's a very different use case from this draft as currently written, though.

Are you suggesting that this document should be extended to cover both and provide separate advice to both? We can do that, but I don't think we should make this document into a generic document that only says "do the right thing for your link type". The reason we have this problem is that vendors and operators do not necessarily know what the right thing for their link type is.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email