IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-liu-bonica-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem

神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp> Tue, 05 November 2013 08:02 UTC

Return-Path: <jinmei.tatuya@gmail.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 E9C2411E822C for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Nov 2013 00:02:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.222
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.222 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
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 MSd69hyVWidv for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Nov 2013 00:02:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wi0-x236.google.com (mail-wi0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 377C711E8238 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Nov 2013 00:02:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wi0-f182.google.com with SMTP id ez12so1666586wid.15 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 05 Nov 2013 00:02:10 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=yIPjYBT5wsjS2lXRGSaY1X0ssiRqL2ZYtZfqVwJsGpw=; b=KBst16YOqrDCn5pQ8QOhyDmOlDnEytGACUloI92Xv4mdXoUM0daGWPgKMKx4YP8GxY kXbyML6CfP1rZJkCDYlcUz4zzxqfI5+XVVvifBNSXfzc10L+14Vg/hTQzRQyOgCE6TTh v5apc1SIT9+O2HFKbNhJTr85fSw44SuBVk7VzKwUkVmpptprFIe7Lxs62MUnrsIGmu3e 98KRXDCQu47kTWG0Iyoirge4SXr40pdfoun1Qq9yQz79usq5iQFeBmKVSfPlKO5e7DlJ LuFvtUnfFhId4jgT3VKJIDzNccx1JqlqPPtGEBm9M6CxiziFnywN+s082QVKVywWPsDA 6xgQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.77.167 with SMTP id t7mr16431316wjw.27.1383638530652; Tue, 05 Nov 2013 00:02:10 -0800 (PST)
Sender: jinmei.tatuya@gmail.com
Received: by 10.194.120.167 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Nov 2013 00:02:10 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1311050427070.26054@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <201310211245.r9LCj0B29668@ftpeng-update.cisco.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1311050427070.26054@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 00:02:10 -0800
X-Google-Sender-Auth: cUWL5py2LO4tu3h2aXt0gM4iuns
Message-ID: <CAJE_bqcsqpeERWmgaC5xW9J_zpBJYCGeVzQmF7y2Ki3jG+AVag@mail.gmail.com>
From: 神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, "draft-liu-bonica-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem@tools.ietf.org" <draft-liu-bonica-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] 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, 05 Nov 2013 08:02:18 -0000

At Tue, 5 Nov 2013 04:30:12 +0100 (CET),
Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote:

> > A new draft has been posted, at http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-liu-bonica-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem. Please take a look at it and comment.
>
> My comment just now at the mic:
>
> I would like to see if any implementation actually deprecates the /64
> onlink prefix when A goes from 1 to 0, or ignores the on-link prefix when
> A=0.

What do you mean by "deprecate the /64 onlink prefix"?

Are you referring to this part of
draft-liu-bonica-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem?

   [...] But when
   SLAAC-configured, and A changed from 1 to 0, the behaviors varied,
   some deprecated SLAAC while some ignored the RA messages.

On re-reading it now, the draft text (specifically "deprecated SLAAC")
is not very clear either, but at least it's clear to me that this is
about address configuration, not about on/off link.

--
JINMEI, Tatuya

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email