IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Please review the No IPv4 draft

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Tue, 15 April 2014 08:54 UTC

Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
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 8D53A1A03D4 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 01:54:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.823
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.823 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.272, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 D-lZ0x956zVk for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 01:54:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (ipv6.swm.pp.se [IPv6:2a00:801::f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1CCC1A03F1 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 01:53:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 20F8FA3; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 10:53:56 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CE89A2; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 10:53:56 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 10:53:56 +0200
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
In-Reply-To: <20140415083615.GB43641@Space.Net>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1404151048250.10236@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <534BF5A5.5010609@viagenie.ca> <CAKD1Yr0j5+r6K8APoFageJz2RESKj5vkk10Ybom0p3Vec_G0YQ@mail.gmail.com> <m2k3argftt.wl%Niall.oReilly@ucd.ie> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1404151026060.10236@uplift.swm.pp.se> <20140415083615.GB43641@Space.Net>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/Clodr-JAh3KiF7jVgxD0zUgfg04
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Please review the No IPv4 draft
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: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 08:54:02 -0000

On Tue, 15 Apr 2014, Gert Doering wrote:

> I agree to this.  Interestingly, this is something else than "just 
> shutdown the dhcpv4 client if this option is detected" - it is "shutdown 
> IPv4", which many OSes can't do today at all (and yes, that needs 
> fixing).

You're right. I just realised I implicitly thought that "shutdown DHCPv4" 
and "shutdown IPv4" is the same thing, but it isn't.

So the flag should really be "of IPv4 and IPv6, use only IPv6" and I 
actually think this is ok to put in IPv6.

I would prefer to see this information in RAs after thinking a bit more of 
this.. And I think it should be hints in the style of M and O flags, 
meaning the client can still try DHCPv4 for a short while if it really 
wants to, but it should listen to the hint if it doesn't see significant 
IPv4 traffic.

Would it make sense to have a "deactivate IPv6 stack for the lifetime of 
this RA"-message as well?

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email