IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] IPv6-Only Preferred DHCPv4 option

Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com> Thu, 05 December 2019 22:26 UTC

Return-Path: <furry13@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 36ABB120168 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 14:26:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 L5hruxGJyGVR for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 14:26:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt1-x830.google.com (mail-qt1-x830.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::830]) (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 544261200EF for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 14:26:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt1-x830.google.com with SMTP id j5so5112552qtq.9 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 14:26:20 -0800 (PST)
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=1flWmiutPmXtgXKSDAzkyxEpXsyXEjkImDWstr5fpVg=; b=h0tYkUx/sKns4FA/r2zdQsAr8Lm771XxZDwahIJetCyr7DOzLTHrR1GjGfbNNieYcD CuVVFMVGWyjHtfJ0/cTuFwGu0Sq69pJ2QUI1A4kA3IRuwMgi+/2Gi/S2oLKGc0l21oUD nawMpgg9bYMOb7zLqs2eHPsuuZYHLkVmrq6gG4RPMbDpNlye6SiktxFgwzgge1PJP0WY ihpTx2DtIvHM1+TxqNLp1ChjeRhPAhiXh9laCvpZuptPhIX6qJMRh5UtAsHV2RzlsQut +NXw/y/etgTrkNIZAvfw9xt03/FNKC2Gmv/mx2UNoR8+H4pEbeEcuGq5ha8cf3E5DKiy NGUg==
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=1flWmiutPmXtgXKSDAzkyxEpXsyXEjkImDWstr5fpVg=; b=TPHEhRNL3XanEy8oZ49t+oDuvAh/SonbAWnzmhkm+olK2ZIl93qv0AmjhLX8Peg442 jZGyFlL6nSoxLmZ7vctaM9qWocABAZNgp8PtPh5tBM+unOZ6hp7UOI/b+ZG6uCJhwFuQ K2qg+0UA4F+PU3WNYHb/7z+D3IbF2Wzrz9eSDT6WSu3f/us0tb6BACiafpI6JfvzsKKF T7bS06GfB6eyF6vcLr2+KikbMIp1C0ZYTnMn5SbT8aawAKs8QN9KysDKJHVH71D804bt J4qjUiZglW7sYgTt1Ylr7BgbiYsCj6tNgqYzt8M85NgmDlk8l8zBhUKsWpyD93wmqgPi jHaw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV+R6QRhPIBvutWloViYAxqL59p02awOE7hnNaAtgzPeltbuK4Z tdhEsAQv8a8nM28TyxG7uUVuD++QFRwXMbHJqIN2iPR0
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwGfI2E4xB5ADBbl9nXcGBY30afgaFeYOKTVZsXF4rDiqvyKoeT7bxBIXe3FjYsDdPcssGnS7wtxPXMTZT4hAs=
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:244f:: with SMTP id d15mr10145328qtd.149.1575584779206; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 14:26:19 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAFU7BAR1JLUZps=CAqJfeQtUf-xQ88RYvgYrPCP+QP0Ter7YFg@mail.gmail.com> <E03BBE6C-3BED-4D49-8F79-0A1B313EFD9D@apple.com> <28594.1575483729@localhost> <7ac18a46-31d9-74cc-117a-0fd908413aac@gmail.com> <m1icmif-0000JrC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
In-Reply-To: <m1icmif-0000JrC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
From: Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2019 09:26:07 +1100
Message-ID: <CAFU7BAThtF=Fio_CZFPA+0D7GBZbzpgXMQ5kBiSK5XKi29vkJw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Philip Homburg <pch-v6ops-9@u-1.phicoh.com>
Cc: V6 Ops List <v6ops@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/FzMCSNsvuycbicE5RJ2VxGOX6zY>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] IPv6-Only Preferred DHCPv4 option
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: Thu, 05 Dec 2019 22:26:21 -0000

On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 7:43 PM Philip Homburg
<pch-v6ops-9@u-1.phicoh.com> wrote:
> I think this draft has different issues.

The authors would be happy to work on getting them fixed if you could
elaborate on what those issues are ;)

> The good thing about this draft is that it doesn't affect legacy networks or
> legacy hosts. It also doesn't affect any host that doesn't implement this
> draft.
>
> The good thing about this mechanism is that it is the DHCP server that decides
> what to do. Given that the DHCP servers hand out IPv4 addresses, we already
> need to trust the DHCP server. So this draft clearly put functionality
> where it belongs.
>
> I'm not sure that it makes sense for an operator to implement this draft.

I'm an operator who could not wait to implement that draft (and I'm
aware of at least one other operator who might be interested).
Maybe I'm not creative enough but all other options of incremental
deployment of IPv6-only I've come up with are much more ugly
(doubling the number of SSIDs/VLANs or having a portal when users have to
request IPv4 so their MACs are whitelisted etc).

> Though I have to admit, this draft could finally end the discusion on
> whether the default SSID on a meeting network should be NAT64 or dual stack.
> With this option it would be upto the host to pick the right way of doing
> IPv4.

Exactly! Wouldn't it be awesome? ;)

-- 
SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email