Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-palet-v6ops-rfc6177-bis-00.txt

David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu> Wed, 29 August 2018 00:04 UTC

Return-Path: <farmer@umn.edu>
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 E006B12426A for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 17:04:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.289
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.289 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=umn.edu
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 T74FlZEETLcy for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 17:04:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mta-p6.oit.umn.edu (mta-p6.oit.umn.edu [134.84.196.206]) (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 59FDE130E29 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 17:04:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mta-p6.oit.umn.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5E13F9E for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Aug 2018 00:04:04 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at umn.edu
Received: from mta-p6.oit.umn.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mta-p6.oit.umn.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zp4tEKejau-1 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 19:04:04 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from mail-vk0-f70.google.com (mail-vk0-f70.google.com [209.85.213.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mta-p6.oit.umn.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78C8FCCC for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 19:04:04 -0500 (CDT)
Received: by mail-vk0-f70.google.com with SMTP id r11-v6so1348061vke.10 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 17:04:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=umn.edu; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=DLBR9U0HE6vqgOATjk6+2zLFsG620Y9MzYRAaTOjqto=; b=Iq8jl+l1zYcSxAY7NMTp2ohop57iKlPMGLrbFGkKNVscH4hWbd2YxAJSBgyTMMs2X/ sBGCgWLehL3zEEWhQe31UBgKrHNJsBZYxtd5lAwqsbu41gpMDDbRQrnKFMt7Rk9/keIr 3yDnA+MHU8ejaPzyXMeDeVbGTpfgN0lQ07I8fN0v5vAx2MJRVkZZiHpnl3UwEZd/Z9U8 6aUvOVjlJ6G9b+DFK0xsDiWnSBPNiAXMYsHNpKHLttJkUt5u6VczcQB9Ns7FWm62sqvU FWwh/36THMQznv4QjM1FQ00v6i6kPTVOspX2VEkhEaxJnu6DV7HaDzfjkgpreYMgC1fM EUsw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=DLBR9U0HE6vqgOATjk6+2zLFsG620Y9MzYRAaTOjqto=; b=WU8hof9tcmgM7cK2UOcbmCQiETneuezckjXgtt/cIri8MHf1c2czJSw1qLJ/Y4vPyx SAe1B+YPCtaX+gwxRQsVXL4evvo3EtEnqbvo/oxClqn6IrJJNIMOUVfYfRCRjHxrCG9v JrVv33IKAlBzOOOUcSaHGyBleUVzjnZ3QwQB3gL9+z7qpWpjCLgN35nvXIkx//YGMzBy yM1egomhBITrlDlvoVyuIIZWd6BaTGPLJAP0vgE18YhT3ETVypWD8sKPFcVvpdbOUFU/ p8s8AV+gLrkvvLm71SndjcTMhTBenQbjQZBMqPqI3fa1+kF3Ydg7zT//5WSPccYFO4gG sQNw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51BBuEYvk6w5oa/CwSqDxEAWJBJ6WPWEPaOmnDEXRJHMGMkM1sZr fNSOXi3UvwoN3IPf0QOfriLE3I57Nx1+KHuqAXiupK+ATKBAzEG1j9AQk4VjK16LsEycfzY7YFW sGJhgCnaupHB3+yNWGCLu6kW+aA==
X-Received: by 2002:a1f:9807:: with SMTP id a7-v6mr2555978vke.65.1535501043119; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 17:04:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0Vdacxdb9MUZXeE9hArcfoyanqe3tb4+5rWuA92lb3+emKuR6ZlSDvzK7fruOX9k4Q7ORZaXT1J2pCpKUN50I6EY=
X-Received: by 2002:a1f:9807:: with SMTP id a7-v6mr2555963vke.65.1535501042707; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 17:04:02 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:a67:3bc7:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 17:04:01 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <A82D3E92-C68D-4685-BD3D-6B2656F9A8A6@gmail.com>
References: <153017691583.14743.17000446834856511528@ietfa.amsl.com> <78a36a81-3bb3-9d47-aa06-8da8f7594677@gmail.com> <C040E02F-7BEC-4FF9-8585-BE380B6859DE@consulintel.es> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1807191054090.7979@networking.stanford.edu> <9142206A0C5BF24CB22755C8EC422E459CB44344@AZ-US1EXMB03.global.avaya.com> <f1bc1848-abe0-553e-0fdf-623eb0d1a871@gmail.com> <9142206A0C5BF24CB22755C8EC422E459CB44E7E@AZ-US1EXMB03.global.avaya.com> <A82D3E92-C68D-4685-BD3D-6B2656F9A8A6@gmail.com>
From: David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu>
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 19:04:01 -0500
Message-ID: <CAN-Dau0-HgSeCxAvSBXMXnuOh0BhY7i_Tm_K7BE4of5jZtnCdA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: "Mudric, Dusan (Dusan)" <dmudric@avaya.com>, "draft-palet-v6ops-rfc6177-bis@ietf.org" <draft-palet-v6ops-rfc6177-bis@ietf.org>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet=40consulintel.es@dmarc.ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000340441057487b2e5"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/RKAToSn_icZYoyyNMcN6KE91-q0>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-palet-v6ops-rfc6177-bis-00.txt
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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, 29 Aug 2018 00:04:09 -0000

On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 5:32 PM, Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Aug 28, 2018, at 8:06 AM, Mudric, Dusan (Dusan) <dmudric@avaya.com>
> wrote:
> > There must a way to define how prefixes are assigned to always allow
> /48, if needed. If not in rfc6177-bis than in another RFC. We have already
> one limitation for SLAAC that makes sure every home gets at least one /64.
> We can add another one, in another RFC, to make sure /48 is given on a
> demand. That will insure future flexibility in any network and make the
> prefix assignment non-political process.
>
> My understanding, no hats and potentially incorrect, is that any ISP I
> know of will respond to a DHCPv6 IA_PD with a prefix at least as large as
> requested, up to /48.
>

Fred, the statement you are making I believe is true for many or most ISP's
providing IPv6 today, but not all. However, way too many ISPs are still not
yet providing IPv6. Further, many of the early IPv6 capable CPE or terminal
devices only ask for a /64 and can't be told otherwise. So when I look at
the current state of things, I'm both optimistic and pessimistic at the
same time.

Dusan, it's not as simple as the ISP are not providing /48s, as Fred says
many, if not most, doing IPv6 are, a big part of the issue is too many CPEs
only ask for a /64, and don't allow a different option. But from the
perspective of a normal end-user they are being limited, and who is at
fault is complicated.  There is plenty of blame to go around for everyone,
the ISPs, the CPE manufacturers, the IETF, and even a little for the
end-users themselves.

RFC7084;
   WPD-2:  The IPv6 CE router MAY indicate as a hint to the delegating
           router the size of the prefix it requires.  If so, it MUST
           ask for a prefix large enough to assign one /64 for each of
           its interfaces, rounded up to the nearest nibble, and SHOULD
           be configurable to ask for more.

I think at least part of the problem is a common one, too many inexpensive
CPE do not implement optional features. Because both ISP's and end-users
have economic incentives to use inexpensive CPE, this creates an incentive
for CPE manufacturers to make inexpensive CPE do not implement optional
features.  Around and around we go.

It is a complicated systemic failure mode we have going here.

Maybe we need "MUST be configurable to ask for more.", which is the IETF's
fault!

Thanks.


-- 
===============================================
David Farmer               Email:farmer@umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE        Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================