Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host-11.txt

David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu> Thu, 28 September 2017 14:09 UTC

Return-Path: <farmer@umn.edu>
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 2848A13314B for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 07:09:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.539
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.539 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, HTML_OBFUSCATE_05_10=0.26, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=umn.edu
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 vYtmT31jBhEw for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 07:09:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mta-p6.oit.umn.edu (mta-p6.oit.umn.edu [134.84.196.206]) (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 2CF6C133079 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 07:09:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mta-p6.oit.umn.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAF53A39 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 14:09:02 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at umn.edu
Received: from mta-p6.oit.umn.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mta-p6.oit.umn.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rRENYMouh7NV for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 09:09:02 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from mail-wr0-f198.google.com (mail-wr0-f198.google.com [209.85.128.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mta-p6.oit.umn.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D6DDA0D for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 09:09:02 -0500 (CDT)
Received: by mail-wr0-f198.google.com with SMTP id z46so2403890wrz.2 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 07:09:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=umn.edu; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=h+/DHnccxPNejF+xCXq9UrQdMByBweWPXEuJIzQwBfQ=; b=CkLruguzMIFuJYbKI8uu8tgGWr/9uLWeyr+maqlGKtTbqFelPwGR47QvnfcM8Ms2Sj eZe9XakTx6Q9NwV++T+KbtgqLEu9Wyuxthbx+r8db43cerH9FxwBG4s5EMWGx6N8pdQA XbTsdmiu4oY26FlRMMv6rEp13RVcUHLmG5Dga72SZr9VlbW0abGFIK6tzred1GdkZx0A X72Hn9KH52hRzRlbYtj7cH+tttijQ+2zjLaHzIhKE2MGu8QX/jPMjqjtoHoR7OqpEbTh fUSHQZWvxPnSDBPO1TQ9ITaWN2zLoty55ypt8Z78gbkNdudraDfhvQAKCZklNWbOu6Hr 5xtA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=h+/DHnccxPNejF+xCXq9UrQdMByBweWPXEuJIzQwBfQ=; b=Bob9gtL748k7mfT94GuRxHep7gpFI2TjYfb462KkCvTs9zIh/FDkZ0YjPkxqXY2zvk 74DumwP1vwdvhKvZ4jxQL7bPQVd3WQ4Eu1fb0g7FbkPZPbL7zMLHCq7GcIwzp2tZtqja 7pox0ZRXK0KgIP1r4gUwQiTEo2aj5bkwVdLxSdbr7JAKadEftt+3smHULr3sCuge85BX 6+GTU2uXnR6sA/SmCcn/qAMRXX6PXVzzOIhFbu0+UXvR+yZA11pbfLIWWkTNYCgeqxU6 7RPhPUsGmN2EZLHX3FuyO7IMA9FsA4w+LlzwiJvzV7gOOcWpZ1zdOkm4Bcj7pVs8Gxrg 7EuA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUg4Et8uDBgNt1NWrYq6JcAhGOsro6ipKMw84OBuVPuh93PZTsUq WltBcI3SF02tFecoj900QJtFKy9zfYUtqjcBby9JvI8/z0ASFhqTh30mJibuaMgfhU+T9cLmOjH gtuRx+88yNkQoPNq/cQn1ZogIVA==
X-Received: by 10.46.18.71 with SMTP id t68mr2068086lje.132.1506607740935; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 07:09:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QCnY11F9lbXiaGbgUcM8hajp79NSH6hQWSNo2b0b0bE2i3+L87rNAeEpHqgiSdgWuHqIs5DpNQV1+llx8ReCl0=
X-Received: by 10.46.18.71 with SMTP id t68mr2068080lje.132.1506607740715; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 07:09:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.25.25.212 with HTTP; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 07:08:59 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <504C386B-260F-452E-8195-3A6E3D3BF40B@nokia.com>
References: <150659896337.13704.16305576151522889075@ietfa.amsl.com> <504C386B-260F-452E-8195-3A6E3D3BF40B@nokia.com>
From: David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 09:08:59 -0500
Message-ID: <CAN-Dau162uPx+t_11YBeotzvp2yt5Z-GfS3eGUHoMiBasVGRug@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" <gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114cf2d6339127055a407313"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/9S_8h03am8D_lmdLQNPtHkV5vyk>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host-11.txt
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 14:09:07 -0000

I like most of the changes, however I find the following bullet somewhat
confusing;

o  Maximum IPv6 Router Advertisement Interval = 300s (or when battery
   consumption is a concern then a MinRtrAdvInterval of 514 seconds
   (1/7 of an hour) is better according RFC7772 [RFC7772]).


It starts out talking about the *Maximum* Router Advertisement Interval,
then with little explanation shifts to talking about the *Minimum* Router
Advertisement Interval, I fear this will easily confuse any casual
readers.  Furthermore, the IPv6 router implementations I'm familiar with,
don't allow you to directly set the Minimum Router Advertisement Interval,
it is automatically computed as 75% of the Maximum Router Advertisement
Interval, as recommended in RFC4861. Therefore, in such implementations the
Maximum Router Advertisement Interval would need to be set at 685 seconds.

Also, as Lorenzo pointed out, there is no discussion of IPv6 Router
LifeTime, which is also discussed in RFC7772.

I suggest the following;

o  Maximum IPv6 Router Advertisement Interval = 300s (or when battery
    consumption is a concern 685s, see Note below)

o  IPv6 Router LifeTime = 3600s (see Note below)

...

Note: When servicing large numbers of battery powered devices, RFC7772
recommends a maximum of 7 RAs per hour and a 45-90 minute IPv6 Router
Lifetime. To achieve a maximum of 7 RAs per hour a MinRtrAdvInterval of 514
seconds (1/7 of an hour) is needed, many router implementation determine
MinRtrAdvInterval = 0.75 * MaxRtrAdvInterval, as recommended in RFC4861
section 6.2.1. Therefore, a Maximum IPv6 Router Advertisement Interval of
685s is recommended. As for the recommended IPv6 Router Lifetime, since
this technique requires that the RAs are sent using the link-layer unicast
address of the subscriber, the concerns over multicast delivery discussed
in RFC7772 are already mitigated, therefore the above suggestion of 3600s
(an hour) is deemed sufficient for this use case.


Thanks.

On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 7:19 AM, Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) <
gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com> wrote:

> This latest version has few idnits and readability improvements.
>
> G/
>
> On 28/09/2017, 13:42, "v6ops on behalf of internet-drafts@ietf.org" <
> v6ops-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of internet-drafts@ietf.org> wrote:
>
>
>     A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> directories.
>     This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations WG of the IETF.
>
>             Title           : Unique IPv6 Prefix Per Host
>             Authors         : John Jason Brzozowski
>                               Gunter Van De Velde
>         Filename        : draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-p
> refix-per-host-11.txt
>         Pages           : 9
>         Date            : 2017-09-28
>
>     Abstract:
>        This document outlines an approach utilising existing IPv6 protocols
>        to allow hosts to be assigned a unique IPv6 prefix (instead of a
>        unique IPv6 address from a shared IPv6 prefix).  Benefits of unique
>        IPv6 prefix over a unique service provider IPv6 address include
>        improved host isolation and enhanced subscriber management on shared
>        network segments.
>
>
>     The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>     https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv
> 6-prefix-per-host/
>
>     There are also htmlized versions available at:
>     https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-pre
> fix-per-host-11
>     https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-uniqu
> e-ipv6-prefix-per-host-11
>
>     A diff from the previous version is available at:
>     https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ip
> v6-prefix-per-host-11
>
>
>     Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
> submission
>     until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>
>     Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>     ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     v6ops mailing list
>     v6ops@ietf.org
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>



-- 
===============================================
David Farmer               Email:farmer@umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE        Phone: 612-626-0815 <(612)%20626-0815>
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952 <(612)%20812-9952>
===============================================