IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-host-addr-availability discussion

Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> Tue, 03 November 2015 02:27 UTC

Return-Path: <lorenzo@google.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 DEA841A87ED for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 18:27:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.388
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.388 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 YQCZ5m0ei_e2 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 18:27:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yk0-x230.google.com (mail-yk0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B855C1ACDB4 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 18:27:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: by ykek133 with SMTP id k133so3130814yke.2 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 02 Nov 2015 18:27:52 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=0T5xTy0+KOHlrvr0Wds+du3X8/hhQLOnfWgl6Dgp/gY=; b=HE9l66WDGHVNXidc1TYfDWhfpzIBsKt7FE7WN6fSS3cZLVBICvS4VFJq9ASsWEm92q EG+hxhTl5GaZXUuUT6q00eCJ3oq0oQUdVVgLddsr+WLmvkiq8vW6ka8P42Oxin/YlQ4X YqtxQcHEk9sp3pSByXk+of8o6n5UksjvZ6dmf1DK2ZEGi2R7+vgvB3XCV+sCIkJ5t8ui j2lXdMREcbRJxZMcGupx1GeaGhqmuT1pVKv7PP2YGuL7Avjv1gijxpbr9JQqm4+7eVbA 2jX7QHRnfeB/tuFaPPNRoV47DPEGql1LQHWKAZGWoBVhbY/QlGkfVJKy242fBTR6cRRi hsAQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=0T5xTy0+KOHlrvr0Wds+du3X8/hhQLOnfWgl6Dgp/gY=; b=E6rwpQppqkId6Q+GoLmD3LeWrjjF3nFbEEJAMrFxn6ZeJbPps5BW+AbkNS3CaurRNc D7PHZCmgqFwoBdEHyetUBMX1kNm0ibqWVqlOY31031eStvWDM0r1T/p7TkXcwifeOugz XyRuWe44FB1DZH7OU4MVkVglHUAuV+9LIZxFEYnk1cVk0OsuJu70HAegTPetHSbiu+Sf 1qIfKRK7tFUnLsa+7tArTxXHc1TRNnB+Y2zufOikPFJEbXNu6Z6oruAN61Un9/TaCO2M 3qM9Htdg5EVQMTFxwykcFDT9wX4DSP+1eslmMJTq9+dDOBUn7yI0/bT+DfjpIWd00l47 wmTQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlllW8HaRXf7cFX8WwQEdzXha9fBPm6B3cxZSO7P2h+Kdp3a/IxItXpQbr7OmGKlE6MHzJw
X-Received: by 10.13.246.70 with SMTP id g67mr20852061ywf.116.1446517671910; Mon, 02 Nov 2015 18:27:51 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.37.87.197 with HTTP; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 18:27:32 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D9831832F3957A@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com>
References: <8D175A1F-B1AE-44B4-838E-1C853B6C937D@cisco.com> <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D9831832F391A7@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> <CAKD1Yr15C-uoxUw0kgWO-d=LmUK8qWGLS7vt+22W+k8xXtDY+g@mail.gmail.com> <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D9831832F393F1@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D9831832F3941D@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> <563811DF.9020603@gmail.com> <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D9831832F394F7@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D9831832F3957A@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2015 11:27:32 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKD1Yr0p2mD2v3XuCTMMXLKKWiE3P1+8fKc+NcmFzgi5s_u_RQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c0338d4ff66ae052399a376"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/B2xg0ermHORUX9cMLGRkfFbIVPQ>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-host-addr-availability discussion
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: Tue, 03 Nov 2015 02:27:54 -0000

On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Templin, Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
wrote:

> Bumping up again, here is a valid and useful instance of multiaddressing:
>
> 1) Client gets a /64 prefix delegation from a DHCPv6 server over interface
> "A"
> 2) Client assigns the /64 to a loopback interface
> 3) Client assigns as many addresses from the /64 as it likes to
>     interface "A" (could be millions or more)
> 4) Client is a pure host (IP forwarding turned off)
> 5) No DAD needed on any interface
>

Why is the client assigning the addresses to interface A instead of
loopback? There is no need for the client to respond to ND to those
addresses.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email