Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic-07.txt - software bugs

[Alexandru Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

Le 13/11/2014 23:33, Brian E Carpenter a écrit :
> On 14/11/2014 11:17, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
>> Le 13/11/2014 22:43, Jeroen Massar a écrit :
>>> On 2014-11-13 22:19, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
>>>> Le 13/11/2014 20:43, Jeroen Massar a écrit :
>>>> [...]
>>>>> This is also what has been discussed on the list:
>>>>>     - deprecate anycast 6to4
>>>>>     - keep direct 6to4
>>>>
>>>> YEs, I agree, and I would like to re-mention the point about software
>>>> bugs.
>>>>
>>>> There is one particular 6to4 implementation in the wild which has two
>>>> different means to put up a 6to4 tunnel.  One is to just say '6to4' in
>>>> the cli, the other is to be specific and type that IPv4 anycast address.
>>>>
>>>> With the first means - it does not work.  Worse, it gets into a mode
>>>> where packets are output destined to random IPv4 addresses.
>>>>
>>>> Fix the bug.
>>>
>>> That is a vendor issue. Nothing the IETF can do about.
>>
>> I agree.
>>
>>>
>>>> What does this mean with respect to the deprecation effort?
>>>
>>> That because of the bug that platform already is useless anyway, thus
>>> effectively it is already deprecated... ;)
>>>
>>>> Do not deprecate the IPv4 anycast address because if so then the entire
>>>> 6to4 software on that platform will no longer work.
>>>
>>> If that platform (which one btw - sponsor) is so broken, then they
>>> currently have
>>> a broken setup anyway. Hence, nothing to be fixed there.
>>>
>>>> Do not deprecate until you offer a solution satisfying a number of
>>>> requirements (currently unsatisfied by eg tunnel brokers).
>>>
>>> Which requirements are these?
>>
>> Ones one would have to lay down and agree on before engaging in new work.
>>
>> For example -1- must allow for reverse DNS ok, -2- must be secureable by
>> existing e2e IPsec, -3- to the extent of possible be easy to set up for
>> Clients and not involve intervention of another party (like when
>> requesting an IPv6 address from an administrator, delayed paper forms,
>> etc).
>
> Anycast 6to4 meets those requirements afaik ;-)

Hm yes and no.  IPsec and anycast never married AFAIK.

6to4 is not alowing for reverse DNS either, if I am not terribly wrong.

Alex

>
>     Brian
>
>
>