[v6ops] Discussion focus: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6rtr-reqs

[Fred Baker <[e-mail]>]

The authors of draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6rtr-reqs have just updated it. I wonder what we, as a working group, think of it?

The diff may be found at https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6rtr-reqs-01.txt. The TOC indicates that several sections have been added.

Some of the observations the draft makes aren't obvious to me. For example:

< 5.7.  IPv6 Operation by Default
<
<    If a device forwards and/or originates IPv4 packets by default
<    (without explicit configuration by the operator), it SHOULD forward
<    and/or originate IPv6 packets by default.  See the security
<    considerations section below for reflections on the automatic
<    configuration of IPv6 forwarding in parallel with IPv4.

If I were writing that, I think I might suggest that systems SHOULD follow the Happy Eyeballs model described in RFC 8305 (which would normally result in IPv6-only operation if the system and its peer are IPv6-capable and IPv6-enabled). The advantage of that is that it is a clear operational specification (this one might lead me to understand that it should always send both an IPv4 and an IPv6 message if it had the capability, which seems counter-intuitive), and would trend toward supporting IPv6-only operation (which I understand to be the point).


So, operators... please read the draft and comment. Having a couple of fairly thorough reviews would help. The target is to be able to have an update to discuss at IETF 101 in March, and move the draft along.

No real deadline, but if you could make your comments in the coming two weeks we can have a focused discussion on it.