Re: [v6ops] Interesting problems with using IPv6

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Wed, 10 September 2014 01:13 UTC

Return-Path: <fgont@si6networks.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 26A7B1A0390 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Sep 2014 18:13:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.602
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 D9iF_N8OV1qH for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Sep 2014 18:13:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from web01.jbserver.net (web01.jbserver.net [IPv6:2a00:8240:6:a::1]) (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 4918F1A0380 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Sep 2014 18:13:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [186.134.45.58] (helo=[192.168.123.128]) by web01.jbserver.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from <fgont@si6networks.com>) id 1XRWTM-0008Lg-Ow; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 03:13:25 +0200
Message-ID: <540F9BE0.5060403@si6networks.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2014 21:31:28 -0300
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andrew 👽 Yourtchenko <ayourtch@gmail.com>, Chuck Anderson <cra@wpi.edu>
References: <1410082125488.85722@surrey.ac.uk> <540CB702.3000605@gmail.com> <20140908183339.GB98785@ricotta.doit.wisc.edu> <540E26D9.3070907@gmail.com> <1410227735.13436.YahooMailNeo@web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <540ECB9E.9000102@foobar.org> <CAKD1Yr1_sCLHv=D3MeCe47Fa0dxXTXH5B+=wOKpvmEDFkJFiZw@mail.gmail.com> <75B6FA9F576969419E42BECB86CB1B89155AF364@xmb-rcd-x06.cisco.com> <20140909142226.GP15839@angus.ind.WPI.EDU> <CAPi140Nwzjh-f_kj9tWmcmcjqh55nUdyr6EjHbQySom+SvX_fQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPi140Nwzjh-f_kj9tWmcmcjqh55nUdyr6EjHbQySom+SvX_fQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/ADrNEKIyJs1-qd_Dx34S1kHt-tE
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Interesting problems with using IPv6
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: <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: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 01:13:34 -0000

On 09/09/2014 12:41 PM, Andrew 👽  Yourtchenko wrote:
> 
> Of course, the amount of manual work this requires today means that
> the A-bit is turned off and the DHCPv6 is being used. Which may be
> perfectly okay - but if it is not, and we do assert that "An RA with
> prefix having an A-bit set and default settings, should not cause the
> 10x expansion to the resource requirements compared to Legacy IP",
> seems like some sort of a correction in default stacks/apps behavior
> with respect to temporary addresses could be useful.

FWIW:
<https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-gont-6man-managing-privacy-extensions-01.txt>

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492