IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] draft-jaeggli-v6ops-indefensible-nd

Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com> Tue, 11 September 2018 08:58 UTC

Return-Path: <markzzzsmith@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 811111310AF for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 01:58:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.497
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.497 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 Y9n3TJujQjxm for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 01:58:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi0-x22a.google.com (mail-oi0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22a]) (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 A645C130E4E for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 01:58:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id k12-v6so45688588oiw.8 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 01:58:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=t5Ws4WxqdKSFegZaJsmVfUi3mqX2DAewG8S2YvXsmRQ=; b=lXLYGEK5ojfahpzQ/dgsP5OEvtorTfH/Em2RIUZ/Fxjp5SF9VPBPpD1lcWqZFa09h0 /T3cwxZ82d+27zHayWcbc4atK/ExQ82pN5+4UyJvIVOgADwn1Iee1Kh05WkU6y6Px72O 6Wk+af3Sw8E65lReigXTtc8r01Ad6QDzwq3XiK4d+hI6MTVSI+DiVRYts6laucwUPncp 0dproB3b9nHt0+0lkcwXFFPYIyBX3IXKBmLk9VwC2rGZi+4+QoOdOBDfg5Nlje8CMuel y1k3XrXGLS3Cj/c/MVvO3u76phtdRI8+px38HcrQZn0DQMch044bcJzvxxCsXkoJl73A 93mw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=t5Ws4WxqdKSFegZaJsmVfUi3mqX2DAewG8S2YvXsmRQ=; b=Kb2RDd6WHKesTBHISoK8AQC4BFJlSgbRhRCGD0aMUozkCl8QiU3IACogLkUQNueIzc 43RVtmNhjzafiPGlqH3Ppm4riaqXXmIQXeXENTu0cfpqXv8KwyeN+DlKbPRPLZikv4f9 oSshZcfaLgXk9cTVs6JAt8iYjIaGlgHcF5LA6rirYesdydN3LSr4P2Q3WuLQbLgB0pYr 2/Tkf6Ag5GqSCJ30UrP5zjycZ7iaAjlCznHgWDdDXjbV9OcqhjGXzFnM3b/OjxUHvDzW N3Gurzj7FJy2XUjaaPyw2EtVrVZI+Xq6FI39HywLRowq0SgY1J0pLrYqqr3GVG7x3/EK icOQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51AfUWYsUa9goJHOSwxuDiqYVMBTcUUVsYVSsFMomZs5W5CRwqsX /1bZlGKDzmk5mPnd8nh+4aCc2IpscLmr21BW1eM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdZPkjAlqvceLYDe5D15aWXwJONQ6br537Ix2u8if5EiyECy2tQLOv0htBVLyyfEeIp3RRZXOtDlWUAnUbMQA00=
X-Received: by 2002:aca:e748:: with SMTP id e69-v6mr26380048oih.263.1536656323559; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 01:58:43 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CO1PR05MB4439DAC0BE86DF0503CEB41AE050@CO1PR05MB443.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <AA63368D-923E-4890-B518-CA8B119BCD7E@employees.org> <CAAedzxrtOrQrqZw-os45sRA2QT2gT7sE8CiuGxFFEssKx26iyw@mail.gmail.com> <FD8E7FA1-86F3-4193-ABBF-97AF25CEE565@employees.org> <CAAedzxpdWEOn21ci0P5zuU8AgFe99kr_kYkAtFwNE90hREqL-g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAedzxpdWEOn21ci0P5zuU8AgFe99kr_kYkAtFwNE90hREqL-g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 18:58:32 +1000
Message-ID: <CAO42Z2xXbeFYaCgidBTsBqPbAz_KSzYMHwRAncqrpTW8_PHaWQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Erik Kline <ek=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>, v6ops list <v6ops@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004ec547057594ae5e"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/BDY2ZLpSB6ZozjCURnWsLr3yDYg>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-jaeggli-v6ops-indefensible-nd
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 11 Sep 2018 08:58:46 -0000

On Tue., 11 Sep. 2018, 16:49 Erik Kline, <ek=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
wrote:

> On Tue, 11 Sep 2018 at 15:34, Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org> wrote:
> >
> > Erik,
> >
> > > On 11 Sep 2018, at 08:22, Erik Kline <ek@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Tue, 11 Sep 2018 at 15:15, Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> You might want to include that this problem has been solved with a
> stateful address assignment mechanism like DHCP, possibly combined with
> SAVI.
> > >>
> > >> The ND ARO option would also have solved this.
> > >>
> > >> Or you could deploy P2P Ethernet, where there is no address
> resolution..
> > >>
> > >> Depending on DAD for this lie Lorenzo proposed seems ill-advised.
> It’s even less robust in wired networks (blocked ports).
> > >
> > > But...in such a network NS/NA works?  (alternatively: what does
> > > "blocked" mean here)
> >
> > NS/NA has retransmission.
> > Blocked as in 802.1D. Default 30s from link-up until port will switch
> user traffic.
>
> Do hosts receive RAs during this 30s window?  If not, then the
> blocking affects DAD for link-local addresses, but not necessarily for
> GUAs.
>
> NOTE: I am most definitely /not/ attempting to argue that DAD is
> reliable.  ;-)
>
> I had a notion about matching forwarding addresses not in cache
> against the MLD info associated with the /104 for a given forwarding
> destination address.  Seems like routers gathering MLD data might use
> that list to prioritize forwarding for destinations not yet in the
> neighbor cache.
>

So did I ;-)

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-smith-v6ops-mitigate-rtr-dos-mld-slctd-node-02


> > DAD is unreliable for lots of reasons . Didn’t we write a draft on that?
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-yourtchenko-6man-dad-issues ?
>
> > Ole
> >
> >
> > >>
> > >>> On 10 Sep 2018, at 16:25, Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Folks,
> > >>>
> > >>> Each week between now and IETF 103, we will review and discuss one
> draft with an eye towards progressing it.
> > >>>
> > >>> This week, please review and comment on
> draft-jaeggli-v6ops-indefensible-nd.
> > >>>
> > >>>                                     Fred and Ron
> > >>>
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> 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
> >
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email