Re: [v6ops] Clarification/addition on the cpe-slaac doc.

[Warren Kumari <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 10:37 AM Bernie Volz (volz) <[e-mail]> wrote:

> It seems odd to me to be cherry picking things for RFC-8415 to reiterate
> as requirements?
>
>
>
> Doesn’t that open up the possibility that someone skips other things
> because “well it wasn’t in the CPE-SLAAC” requirements?
>

Maybe, but I *think* that this requirement is more closely related to the
CPE-SLAAC that the others in RFC8415. We do already have some callouts to
RFC8415 like:
"This is in line with the requirement from Section 6.3 of [RFC8415], which
states that "if the delegated prefix or a prefix derived from it is advertised
for stateless address autoconfiguration [RFC4862], the advertised preferred
and valid lifetimes MUST NOT exceed the corresponding remaining lifetimes
of the delegated prefix."

Perhaps we should just clarify that this document just draws attention to
requirements in 8415, and doesn't replace it (which should be obvious, but
I agree may be worth doing).
W


>
>
>    - Bernie
>
>
>
> *From:* v6ops <[e-mail]> *On Behalf Of * Warren Kumari
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 10, 2021 10:09 AM
> *To:* Ole Troan <[e-mail]>
> *Cc:* IPv6 Operations <[e-mail]>
> *Subject:* Re: [v6ops] Clarification/addition on the cpe-slaac doc.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 10:05 AM <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > During the final editing of cpe-slaac, the authors noticed that we
> should have included:
> > “WPD-10: CE routers SHOULD, by default, attempt to use a stable IAID
> value that does not change between CE restarts, DHCPv6 client restarts, or
> interface state changes. e.g., Transient PPP interfaces.”
> >
> > To me this seems like an obvious and non-contentious clarification (it's
> already required in RFC8145), and so I'm asking the authors to include it
> while addressing the other IESG comments/ballots.
>
> I think you mean 8415, but at least all the digits are there.
>
>
>
> I did indeed :-)
>
>
>
>
>
> I support the change, but I do think it should be strengthened.
> An "unintended" change in IAID has dire consequences for the end-user
> network.
>
> "WPD-10: CE routers MUST by default use a stable IAID value that does not
> change between CE restarts, DHCPv6 client restarts, or interface state
> changes. e.g., Transient PPP interfaces."
>
> 8415 has: "For any given use of an IA by the client, the IAID for that IA
> MUST be consistent across restarts of the DHCP client."...
>
>
>
> Fair enough. That's better, and the new proposed text; I actually intended
> to copy and paste the RFC 8415 (see, I *can* type :-)) but forgot....
>
> Thanks!
>
> W
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Ole
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> The computing scientist’s main challenge is not to get confused by the
> complexities of his own making.
>   -- E. W. Dijkstra
>


-- 
The computing scientist’s main challenge is not to get confused by the
complexities of his own making.
  -- E. W. Dijkstra