IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Implementation Status of PREF64

otroan@employees.org Thu, 07 October 2021 14:17 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
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 BD1F03A05F0 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Oct 2021 07:17:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=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 dekOeGdhZfSP for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Oct 2021 07:17:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from clarinet.employees.org (clarinet.employees.org [198.137.202.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CAEAF3A0646 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Oct 2021 07:17:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from astfgl.hanazo.no (ti0389q160-5225.bb.online.no [95.34.0.166]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by clarinet.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1B68B4E11B45; Thu, 7 Oct 2021 14:17:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by astfgl.hanazo.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D676624329B; Thu, 7 Oct 2021 16:17:27 +0200 (CEST)
From: otroan@employees.org
Message-Id: <6ED2B6AD-401E-4C0F-A863-3A3F5B4112C0@employees.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_6F6F40A1-F5BB-4473-8C62-C796102720E7"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha256"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.120.0.1.13\))
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2021 16:17:26 +0200
In-Reply-To: <DM6PR02MB69249D4F0A8003E77EC9F153C3B19@DM6PR02MB6924.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Cc: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, v6ops list <v6ops@ietf.org>
To: Barbara H Stark <bs7652@att.com>
References: <DDA36020-90CC-471B-83AD-3D98950F1164@delong.com> <CAKD1Yr0T-7t-UHbsJBMLpTjKhPAV5uUQkux6oby89TVUue7PyA@mail.gmail.com> <CO1PR11MB4881D400EA4681F1505040D2D8AA9@CO1PR11MB4881.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CAKD1Yr3TmqFxjKuZ57wS7VuPOf6rJvOwnvnQdFrRLQ=DkZ+CCw@mail.gmail.com> <CO1PR11MB4881F411A4D5BEA7A8479726D8AA9@CO1PR11MB4881.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <D8AEA194-293B-43E4-BCAE-33CD81FB7D8C@delong.com> <CAKD1Yr2Tug-PFV7wAh0s6-gw8W3LcLG7wC1fD7Lu_hMZQYKdtw@mail.gmail.com> <08D2885E-B824-48E8-9703-DCA98771FA37@delong.com> <CAKD1Yr2EVsY3tYUf56R0Q1+KVrowtqh-HgwXj5vxzy4wd-vkTg@mail.gmail.com> <1A6ED87B-666E-439C-852F-2E5C904C0515@delong.com> <CAKD1Yr23fY2DJDvB-9eVFRsxnBnZQ0kZuZfYUfRUHYW=_D=enA@mail.gmail.com> <CAN-Dau1z0q0R61x7iY+Wg_cFRU0jmqr+fR0y=bSXxj+K-n722w@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr1T_mXfxJGHOrBfqZfexm6GTrUqnFi57710pTroKQK6uQ@mail.gmail.com> <702CB018-1A02-4B32-B9AA-7C7B31521F12@delong.com> <CAKD1Yr0jZR8Efzr_Y6FeiBvHYS8ATmDupx2ABTXXy-rSA_QjmA@mail.gmail.com> <1adb70a8-db0a-4ea6-f721-c1035343cda3@foobar.org> <DM6PR02MB69249D4F0A8003E77EC9F153C3B19@DM6PR02MB6924.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.120.0.1.13)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/K6tZX22mH0t64sheXFMt8M9Y8eA>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] 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: Thu, 07 Oct 2021 14:17:37 -0000

>>> but hosts should not
>>> be able to set policies on how many IPv6 addresses they accept.
>> 
>> Sure they can.  There's nothing stopping a dhcpv6 client from refusing
>> to enable ipv6 on an interface if it gets less than N addresses.
> 
> Host policy should be dictated by the people in control of the host and not IETF.
> IETF has no business restricting the rights of device owners and private networks operators to dictate what devices are allowed to do on their network. This sort of prohibition on device owners and private network admins setting host policy would be 100% harmful.
> I'm having visions of IETF becoming not unlike the Texas legislature in its desire to dictate "morality".

in the IPv6 working group we have seen multiple areas where this tussles play out like that. Almost like a proxy war.
If it's prefix length or if it's DHCP vs RA or others.

Any views on how we as a community can move away from acting as the IPv6 morality police?

O.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email