IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Multicast problem in IPv6 address management

Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Wed, 12 August 2020 16:58 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@strayalpha.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 46F043A02F7; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 09:58:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.317
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.317 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=strayalpha.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 RhAd_fhXod0y; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 09:58:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server217-4.web-hosting.com (server217-4.web-hosting.com [198.54.116.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4EB253A1503; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 09:58:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=strayalpha.com; s=default; h=To:References:Message-Id:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To: From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Sender: Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender :Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=a9hBq2ZY9bdRU4PdtEvTzk4eQiFaWD+gWwCVPOrjOHE=; b=glzJIpAQW9QQNiKCuy3mzCWO1C tqNYWybm0EHBXbKM6oW7VPMvbDkqQOFvihDvN8g7pnOHHkwF1nQDt0MJ8zAXcuFytjX388RgBnWKw CX7gtoNivegrPbSOj2wiTI+6VLmpRnMs/cBrYBvbATnJHRciMw7g4zI7PBcMM3YxYgo3BCi4W242l ufDarQguEzDYk6QlzhacV3TyZyGmPBee+zViP/4k7zErAMXP/tg+jFoU86C8Sx7rM40msU7kHOMtI ZitD2RdFrN/lrAqOhEmcw4A42mlqCCM/C6uqMBZ0WCOkpkxXBAcaUdok+LYCsszh0r6lkNRxZiDTr kOHpTGTA==;
Received: from cpe-172-250-225-198.socal.res.rr.com ([172.250.225.198]:64663 helo=[192.168.1.5]) by server217.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from <touch@strayalpha.com>) id 1k5u4j-0044Pm-Pa; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 12:58:10 -0400
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-6906B399-68FE-4C83-B340-854F14A37BDB"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
In-Reply-To: <54d926767ff14e6d98a034f525e5521f@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 09:58:05 -0700
Cc: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>, "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <8B672A3B-0917-46FE-B00C-13DCD7059F7A@strayalpha.com>
References: <54d926767ff14e6d98a034f525e5521f@huawei.com>
To: Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (17G68)
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server217.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - strayalpha.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server217.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: server217.web-hosting.com: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/H4Qirx2wi0CvWNYCI1W5Lzm4cGE>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Multicast problem in IPv6 address management
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, 12 Aug 2020 16:58:58 -0000

Rfc3819

Sorry for the typo

> On Aug 12, 2020, at 9:56 AM, Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi Joe,
> I am not aware about any “Intellectual Property Rights” in respect of discussed.
> And I have not understood how “Ethernet Automatic Protection Switching (Version 1)” could help for Wireless.
> I strongly suspect that you mistyped RFC number.
> Eduard
> From: Joe Touch [mailto:touch@strayalpha.com] 
> Sent: 12 августа 2020 г. 19:23
> To: Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com>
> Cc: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>; Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>; v6ops@ietf.org; IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [v6ops] Multicast problem in IPv6 address management
>  
> See rfc3619 Sections 5 and 6.
>  
> Joe
> 
> 
> On Aug 12, 2020, at 3:51 AM, Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> This dispute is about: Should we assume that Multicast is the basic technology available on any L2? Should we rely fundamental mechanisms on Multicast?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email