Re: [v6ops] Clarification/addition on the cpe-slaac doc.

otroan@employees.org Wed, 10 February 2021 15:05 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
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 98D9D3A0D29 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 07:05:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 uBtuo0RB5phJ for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 07:05:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from clarinet.employees.org (clarinet.employees.org [198.137.202.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2A163A0D27 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 07:05:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from astfgl.hanazo.no (201.51-175-101.customer.lyse.net [51.175.101.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by clarinet.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3F1374E138E6; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 15:05:18 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by astfgl.hanazo.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 617674EB03DB; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 16:05:16 +0100 (CET)
From: otroan@employees.org
Message-Id: <888118D6-1F56-4ED3-9F3E-745DA9F590D8@employees.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_C0A165DB-CE13-44A4-BAFF-6D510173F49A"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.40.0.2.32\))
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 16:05:15 +0100
In-Reply-To: <CAHw9_i+uALQiarCRs=m7rBNJ25R62PmRev2zHm+vZ=2VJw9yHw@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
To: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
References: <CAHw9_i+uALQiarCRs=m7rBNJ25R62PmRev2zHm+vZ=2VJw9yHw@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.40.0.2.32)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/Cc2khbrXS6kiIIIwSImpPtN75V4>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Clarification/addition on the cpe-slaac doc.
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: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 15:05:21 -0000

> During the final editing of cpe-slaac, the authors noticed that we should have included:
> “WPD-10: CE routers SHOULD, by default, attempt to use a stable IAID value that does not change between CE restarts, DHCPv6 client restarts, or interface state changes. e.g., Transient PPP interfaces.”
> 
> To me this seems like an obvious and non-contentious clarification (it's already required in RFC8145), and so I'm asking the authors to include it while addressing the other IESG comments/ballots.

I think you mean 8415, but at least all the digits are there.
I support the change, but I do think it should be strengthened.
An "unintended" change in IAID has dire consequences for the end-user network.

"WPD-10: CE routers MUST by default use a stable IAID value that does not change between CE restarts, DHCPv6 client restarts, or interface state changes. e.g., Transient PPP interfaces."

8415 has: "For any given use of an IA by the client, the IAID for that IA MUST be consistent across restarts of the DHCP client."...

Ole