IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Focused discussion: draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host

Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> Mon, 04 January 2016 08:03 UTC

Return-Path: <lorenzo@google.com>
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 EAD761A21A0 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 00:03:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.388
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.388 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
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 dciAG01T3sLs for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 00:03:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yk0-x22d.google.com (mail-yk0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::22d]) (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 C0DCE1A0056 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 00:03:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yk0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id x67so239750568ykd.2 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 04 Jan 2016 00:03:47 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=5MNX+TqvHiIRHQCiCKma4ld8R/F46lHvHDjm91nVgVA=; b=cM6B0eXdeZZRnHdcHfMp4xQhtRuD0prgHy8yLItrpV2x1HS6qsFOzf918+Fjb9bub7 RZBz7lau9e5C6CLJHVw3jRZIlfyqMxkJQyoxlcUKelp8lhAJoqTKpEoPhycByyDWp3HT oqfORlbkaraFaamHu9+Z7C6UX/MMlXFyLXUU05PVXRr+MrsqJFxuAAJwIELuZS9x6mOe Ei/lqNoFZ8pEBEGiQRSby4poRDryUm0SSGWM0dF5OFmHxm7DH8QOHtsDa0E3NXijXuyu YgMxexFtytrYN4Bs4zW11pXCccW3t8vQkylqAZ2T7FxOj0p0zkTTJ1SK09bph7YvSu5r vqMw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=5MNX+TqvHiIRHQCiCKma4ld8R/F46lHvHDjm91nVgVA=; b=C1YS9ZS1SpDi4vuo52e9AnTHtC3x51gzm2ZRBWU2nirLcCxXUzEaxa7fXD0Fgvv8nW LFPwFFt5vctk44mVO7WxsqILktq5tMfrwbXwCPHcBx52Ebk/cIFS+OwHdYhgcdbDBSj3 28+DUxt3XJZ+wWSzxkEIO620iFrRvoUmSUUZysV/PeTEDGhY4d0JIPnsE8OEuYhjzTUU 7uI1kUEC8f392V36XqTKX7UD0zZ7VC+qPgHV4ZGct7VBpJVrsd0omnuACWMdZFZkAAn3 jvYYB+lcXAA9V34I6tpSLnOVW39Qi/zK7IZe9xXJPOl+ZmksttkEK/XPIiNdgpsxWJqj 9Smg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmkus95qKGFTfmIyYA9ON2EmeDc5mw2Kot0AE5qZzMaeeQ/2c/mLT8ECdnpuOjDPkKB+twsUgUHcEVoypvPeUjKClX9LmjERjSaG6xz36n3AhkB5fM=
X-Received: by 10.129.45.137 with SMTP id t131mr58788527ywt.337.1451894627011; Mon, 04 Jan 2016 00:03:47 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.37.208.201 with HTTP; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 00:03:27 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <336255C7-CC6E-43EC-AE53-F771D91703D5@alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <201601031900.u03J0LMe009763@irp-lnx1.cisco.com> <CAKD1Yr3RY1oUtQnN675djc22f7B1Fhx0Ntsmr9rmZVEqmygRDg@mail.gmail.com> <336255C7-CC6E-43EC-AE53-F771D91703D5@alcatel-lucent.com>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2016 17:03:27 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKD1Yr0eicS2e7L5EK2YGpo2NPa2mf2k8rL6n89BpwYYp1cM8Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: "VAN DE VELDE, Gunter (Gunter)" <gunter.van_de_velde@alcatel-lucent.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1141e9b67f1e7b05287d8f98"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/Hwn6GEGFeCWW-Ir8neyHV-l8DMk>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" <v6ops@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Focused discussion: draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host
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: <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: Mon, 04 Jan 2016 08:03:49 -0000

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 4:49 PM, VAN DE VELDE, Gunter (Gunter) <
gunter.van_de_velde@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:

>
>    - The AP could inform the WLAN-GW of when a subscriber disappeared.
>    - The WLAN-GW could time out any GRE interface that had not received
>    any packets in the last X minutes, or if the customer's /64 prefix had not
>    originated any packets in the last X minutes.
>
> <>end snip<>
>
> Yes, this process is indeed a mistake in added in this text. What is
> happening in reality is a ND exchange check if the subscriber is still
> alive.
>

But even for an ND exchange, the WLAN-GW needs to keep state on the IPv6
address(es) used by the client.

Which one? It can't use the global addresses, since to find out what they
are it would have to resort to ugly hacks like DAD snooping or traffic
snooping - and even then there is no reliable way to know if an address has
been deleted by the host (e.g., if a privacy address timed out).

I suppose it could use the link-local address that was used to send the RS
(on the assumption that link-local addresses never change), but if so, the
draft should document it explicitly.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email