Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-dhcp-pd-per-device-00.txt

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Thu, 18 May 2023 21:02 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
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 DDD23C151081 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 May 2023 14:02:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZRcnp6HgcsPv for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 May 2023 14:02:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf1-x436.google.com (mail-pf1-x436.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::436]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49055C14CE2B for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 May 2023 14:02:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf1-x436.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-64d2a87b9daso468749b3a.0 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 May 2023 14:02:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1684443728; x=1687035728; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=eBSnwkICxcmy8YCzDbdppVPEj8hQ9oRXr4T2ZRoS9LU=; b=fp5rEAvU3jNylz0NZQ8RzIZOf07tUkQ7yDB54qdGfJgGVyGmlE1i8GEJHuyWTBYOcN ntQsgO8LXEU3pgWHgEqN9GLHkvg4339hC+Epza6ePYPkaq9UP9uv1vEhOmLSpunCphCB CRa4s3V435paWHYwdnfCGRnRCnkHu8X/WcrilP5Bw9IVlOxM4l0bSk8Xpz1uUAPJlybm yIS79TJ/BaRz+UXRyF86ke2+pLRYAvN+xtkgVN/Yi2uWi3U2hRa1Dvw4kF/VJC62N7Kg aX9VlUQvYAliYRAunYMkG+MfADo6LyLQMD0KXVe9WKK48P5GMOpn0NkTyFV3IOu1iDgB tOdw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1684443728; x=1687035728; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=eBSnwkICxcmy8YCzDbdppVPEj8hQ9oRXr4T2ZRoS9LU=; b=Fow8xmK3wFt7gZULlUGTdLak+3u8HkgfoAb1ySTb4lKc65xHc46GoFqAJnPS4WDKZ4 +N0WOukMmkk8q43XdrJ1GirJnHcoLkpenaZ1SWd894qXyUzBQCPqK49wlcPoHiAWf3nO o0khIjaDUoRjXneViGxiZ7CVN1f52a+DqENaI4KIHRYpzb6/EJZd9OsTWKLTW+h5Erko yQdNy7l4v0uJLfc+/C+KFwmc2gp+vthEiL1sCXBjH0h98tl16teBPfB01dvg5v3QWUif sh0dxp/WlVdUJgKbHRauhbuuAstRT3pq7Xeph0e0socC96se1ZbyA6W3U0KgO7dAkIwi dmyA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDzbe/aQ93xUD1tDQT4HVJLgK5SS24Tttp/3x0QHE22H7ZlmCena BrsdU8zpLd8CUF5ioDrEOrwcs9LbESZkew==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ4cotl6sp6rvJEIYNRB/XrOlB7tC5U+U4NTDEjKQmU2MOvuaJK9ZAP6xPHpY+LtEulnzVfLHg==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a20:8f16:b0:101:2160:ff8f with SMTP id b22-20020a056a208f1600b001012160ff8fmr1539851pzk.11.1684443727546; Thu, 18 May 2023 14:02:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPV6:2406:e003:1184:f001:9991:d1ad:8c20:42bd? ([2406:e003:1184:f001:9991:d1ad:8c20:42bd]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b7-20020a170903228700b001a6a6169d45sm1902927plh.168.2023.05.18.14.02.05 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 18 May 2023 14:02:07 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <8936207b-860e-975e-4052-6c1598208d92@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 May 2023 09:02:03 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.10.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.eduard=40huawei.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
References: <168442407010.2544.7512872622955254077@ietfa.amsl.com> <ed88eaba055b4dbfa079a6dd0752c910@huawei.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <ed88eaba055b4dbfa079a6dd0752c910@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/RdCaaXnK7t1lzWtSQ9wiLWm9GWk>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-dhcp-pd-per-device-00.txt
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 18 May 2023 21:02:12 -0000

On 19-May-23 03:59, Vasilenko Eduard wrote:
> Section 4 is still misleading people that SLAAC (and /64 as a consequence) are mandatory.

The draft says:

     because all IPv6 nodes are required to support SLAAC.

This is not quite true. BCP 220 (RFC 8504) says:

    Hosts MUST support IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration.

In the context of this draft, that discrepancy is unimportant.

Of course, sites MAY choose to deploy DHCPv6 instead of SLAAC, but that doesn't remove the MUST for hosts.

     Brian

> In fact, section 4 assumes some special "complex host" that has a virtual router inside. Is it still a host? Does the virtual router need additional specifications?
> Albeit, in the majority of cases, a normal host would not have a virtual router inside.
> Moreover, even virtualized host (with many VMs or Containers) would have a virtual switch inside, not a router.
> Hence, for the great majority of cases, SLAAC is not relevant.
> Section 4 is still misleading.
> 
> Nothing in the draft is about the possibility to use prefixes different from /64.
> 
> The draft is still targeted for one corner case (with a virtual router inside the host),
> Discarding the possibility to use the solution on a much broader set of use cases.
> 
> Ed/
> -----Original Message-----
> From: v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of internet-drafts@ietf.org
> Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2023 6:35 PM
> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org
> Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
> Subject: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-dhcp-pd-per-device-00.txt
> 
> 
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This Internet-Draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations (V6OPS) WG of the IETF.
> 
>     Title           : Using DHCP-PD to Allocate Unique IPv6 Prefix per Device in Broadcast Networks
>     Authors         : Lorenzo Colitti
>                       Jen Linkova
>                       Xiao Ma
>     Filename        : draft-ietf-v6ops-dhcp-pd-per-device-00.txt
>     Pages           : 14
>     Date            : 2023-05-18
> 
> Abstract:
>     This document discusses the IPv6 deployment scenario when individual
>     devices connected to broadcast networks (like WiFi hotspots or
>     enterprise networks) are allocated unique prefixes via DHCP-PD.
> 
> The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-dhcp-pd-per-device/
> 
> There is also an HTML version available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-v6ops-dhcp-pd-per-device-00.html
> 
> Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
> 
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops