Re: [v6ops] draft-templin-v6ops-pdhost a working group draft?

Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 29 November 2017 23:32 UTC

Return-Path: <fredbaker.ietf@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 C148F12700F for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 15:32:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 01Jsin_86PCL for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 15:32:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ot0-x22f.google.com (mail-ot0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c0f::22f]) (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 4283B126E3A for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 15:32:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ot0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id e74so4615426ote.7 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 15:32:28 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=CofN6bXZIXKYpx9YdYX7nQyTmkDhfQQl/Lu2HVEXvrk=; b=s6IxfvglDOPp6uE1gG4CjvftbIdx/zEfhbBv7XCMSvsfQHk88DMSz1PuW/diXzLN1V Xlpqnng5glvOwvE/+uQxDDT/rh9jg4Li+P39DPuPVX20KQ9+POg5mSWvwGeHYtTHTd3N ZQAgG1jQfudmy2U1DDs/RQ9UUVQM30tHit58VPI7T09UUadTvJ5Fo1ZfKWYLuDsXenld ebUZVWfLtX5W5iF8soPAJYXl5PsmswDBFZ/MIJ1sx/jJW3PsgwZTGEr7znQ/wIc4Fds8 juG4caMyyZUHSX/VuR5tR9lcFvlyDQrfx25LNZq/FE7ezuM2pZCsb9fmmqYSG6RrPdTi lI+w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=CofN6bXZIXKYpx9YdYX7nQyTmkDhfQQl/Lu2HVEXvrk=; b=LvSIq/5OX2Q+XU90gkgvvKluuS874KXn+DPUjOhjKCSCiMGIRypH/uT6X/8e3VPlmo njDHybZef39yt5go2mCyf0RCk8iB9jDVi/XxgRMUESg3CCG5yyMtLODdrRtVP2SgKwIx Q0lJnvlAJzuJ4WWl6lU+PmAqS/+34PyY+/ynqaiuMgv/NHlctjAFY5oHqDihvyCScQyi wytQULw5D/DtPmgYxKIE5/oTOZi8ghQsKriFFzheQ93X/i4SM3xEapqVpxE4aarMreUd fcAvgmrnQ08qkKnw8ScaijjQ4gHxdO/A6EWi7ZtltNEHwB2ksw9UB08VLFr2nC8Fv2G3 fStQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX5JWjSu8/XO91U5pFzCsqODSORJ/g+JrOrtDUTJcKiL6sTyq09x biCyTOu4cLzKVIhiswHYaUQ=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMboNW0mmxdxjEyK2K+g3cxEhyv/skrKOthi85UqPdZPLV6ft+7SoDtpPktrU4XKwsKXoUgUOg==
X-Received: by 10.157.51.143 with SMTP id u15mr3475609otc.98.1511998347680; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 15:32:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2600:8802:5600:f7a::1028? ([2600:8802:5600:f7a::1028]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x127sm1172762oix.8.2017.11.29.15.32.25 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 29 Nov 2017 15:32:26 -0800 (PST)
From: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <9A3E4D1C-A244-4562-9AEC-63F0CB67FDAA@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_735345C6-D78B-4D60-9DA3-1BB2D23167AE"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.2 \(3445.5.20\))
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 15:32:24 -0800
In-Reply-To: <CAHaKRvJitKKC_AL57eekvr3QRhT42sx0qoSyDKF7xsFMCWtE9A@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: james woodyatt <jhw@google.com>, "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
To: Paul Marks <pmarks@google.com>
References: <34cf035352254aadb3146dffb3baebb0@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com> <CAHaKRvJCabgnc3U-ouZ1ghmwYzOQ+H1fDHwKrac6ghxaH=+Zdw@mail.gmail.com> <42B4C703-00FF-4C44-984D-71D5A7736BE9@google.com> <CAHaKRvJitKKC_AL57eekvr3QRhT42sx0qoSyDKF7xsFMCWtE9A@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/CigQSYA5XPtwpclWJ3LvWROTGkQ>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-templin-v6ops-pdhost a working group draft?
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 29 Nov 2017 23:32:30 -0000


> On Nov 29, 2017, at 3:01 PM, Paul Marks <pmarks@google.com> wrote:
> 
> RFC4291 says "a subnet prefix is associated with one link", but a pdhost prefix is assigned to a host, which doesn't really behave like a link (there's no neighbor discovery, for example.)
> 
> So, is a pdhost prefix actually a "subnet prefix" (with reserved addresses), or something distinct?

I would argue that it is a prefix, in the sense that a prefix advertised in BGP is a prefix.

> I would advocate for permitting the host to do whatever it wants with the (128-n) bits.  That could include "treat it like a regular subnet prefix" or "build a service where every hash(content) gets an IP address."

I'm not going to argue against that. That said, "every hash gets an address" works for a 64 bit IID if the hash can be expressed in 64 bits. It might argue in a direction you didn't intend. And you really don't want to make 128-n work badly for SLAAC, if fielded systems use SLACC (I'm told a number of them do).

I tend to think of the IA_PD prefix as a bundle of /64 prefixes.