Re: [v6ops] Re-evaluating RFC7934 (was: Re: Implementation Status of PREF64)
Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> Tue, 28 September 2021 12:25 UTC
Return-Path: <lorenzo@google.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 4476B3A2BA9 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:25:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -18.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-18.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.499, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 VmNhQG24VhWn for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:25:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x42c.google.com (mail-wr1-x42c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42c]) (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 354743A2BA1 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:25:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x42c.google.com with SMTP id t8so57844379wri.1 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:25:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=PkD04bF+hy2T7n6vlwl6mm9KvoM2kfvKAsQvNAHnKyc=; b=kvOEW/f7UvPwUgSGJ/Hz0PELP2W/YmEhhetJPceFoWqdbYUVu1zGqtsripVMZgq2Qf KjVxPOLxxLHKgQET6pnht9148qm8MRssgNZf1Pz492+fZE3aHwTnqRWSiWydRn+DO0kV dY1S0Y1O2snHiHc/LFC0KkB5nHlsWGYql454hH1qcCFr+2ENnD3kc5eYSYWTCRfnSFhI XYj8lenPtvDCPTAyLSzLTT6LuMoZ9iQt8PSJOdMj3h5b/3PQ5KHcFLYJuPjmjSYIqkJf WEfE9YluUIkwd68RLyNYpYUic2KPFchNXqQxNjMlOTdsmDS/wUQITSyNBwVbdzkJfx6l 5mvg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=PkD04bF+hy2T7n6vlwl6mm9KvoM2kfvKAsQvNAHnKyc=; b=mZy4xOI4oJRINsjkMqVX0dWNXCFGma46Sow18nQjQGu+FIShJqAlVMILyP0VmE4erw O68z8h7PD71QRdP0hw7BYCXm0Wl0cQCIPuc3Fy50ayX8Rl4CwFLuy9vCa1HxWFf/Aqmt rAQ0xi2YaF/cx0hNX6FocRNRjSQ8iaBkbTgkuRDc1yuWvb422xXyVnWVVLTv9Gl+WCyj O/yJNr/XQxjBke1JDMCGYrKGvMUNGxqf5dJ9mxcOFldkpduTua+zrkB43F06aI4kYd9Y JsvD/bEO12dxsTdbC9R1XZs/Pgm2twMt2yM7thNed4l0EzWBrG2QeLHHUh6+w/mcvM7/ 5Ruw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532yv2EfMHS1B8SfTRJf/tIboHofpymOv5h8Akmuzr569YJFl0Le 0OyCP4pYPJtLB6b0gauPVXNJBoY342FPgUHJaB6Gjw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxPApK0N/8IZpVF5Dp4VuanrN6+3nISE4fDrv1kri4sNYRgZoBQPAkRHoefhQOYkOmNEW6VfWlTAxhtZPnP5K0=
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:47a4:: with SMTP id 4mr6239886wrb.374.1632831927543; Tue, 28 Sep 2021 05:25:27 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4527b90f-ed82-287c-29a9-8eb7f9079959@foobar.org>
In-Reply-To: <4527b90f-ed82-287c-29a9-8eb7f9079959@foobar.org>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2021 21:25:14 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKD1Yr1WKeWkorTxxvNAd=i+CBaY-akg0vC3zYRKWK3QN3W64A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
Cc: V6 Ops List <v6ops@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000005bd0f05cd0d4f52"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/CpQbXhTHTd2JG7ZPZOZjbnYSk48>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Re-evaluating RFC7934 (was: Re: Implementation Status of PREF64)
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, 28 Sep 2021 12:25:37 -0000
On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 6:50 PM Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 1:54 PM Owen DeLong <owen= > 40delong.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > > Sometimes the network administrator doesn’t want the host using > > multiple IP addresses for a variety of reasons. > > > > Ok, but that's also harmful for a variety of reasons, and for general > > purpose devices, it's not recommended by the IETF. That's exactly what > > RFC 7934 is about - explaining why it's harmful. > > Why are we having this discussion? DHCPv6 support IA_TA. > If the administrator has decided that the host should not use multiple IP addresses, then IA_TA obviously can't be used.
- [v6ops] Re-evaluating RFC7934 (was: Re: Implement… Nick Hilliard
- Re: [v6ops] Re-evaluating RFC7934 (was: Re: Imple… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] Re-evaluating RFC7934 Nick Hilliard
- Re: [v6ops] Re-evaluating RFC7934 Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] Re-evaluating RFC7934 (was: Re: Imple… Owen DeLong
- Re: [v6ops] Re-evaluating RFC7934 Owen DeLong