Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-host-addr-availability discussion

"Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> Mon, 02 November 2015 23:59 UTC

Return-Path: <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 413F11A9128 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 15:59:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 qDsS1twCxSKJ for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 15:59:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from blv-mbsout-01.boeing.com (blv-mbsout-01.boeing.com [130.76.32.231]) (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 0E1011A9127 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 15:59:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blv-mbsout-01.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id tA2NxDHq001080; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 15:59:13 -0800
Received: from XCH-PHX-509.sw.nos.boeing.com (xch-phx-509.sw.nos.boeing.com [10.57.37.31]) by blv-mbsout-01.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id tA2Nx83o001059 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=OK); Mon, 2 Nov 2015 15:59:08 -0800
Received: from XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com ([169.254.4.14]) by XCH-PHX-509.sw.nos.boeing.com ([169.254.9.13]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 15:59:05 -0800
From: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
To: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>, "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: draft-ietf-v6ops-host-addr-availability discussion
Thread-Index: AQHRFS2IJ4h76jRqCkuPztS49pNk7Z6JZjug
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 23:59:04 +0000
Message-ID: <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D9831832F391A7@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com>
References: <8D175A1F-B1AE-44B4-838E-1C853B6C937D@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <8D175A1F-B1AE-44B4-838E-1C853B6C937D@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [130.247.104.6]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/SujPgvYgsPiUQhNSku0321QDDw4>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-host-addr-availability discussion
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Mon, 02 Nov 2015 23:59:13 -0000

I have one text addition suggestion and one question. On P. 7, in Table 1,
suggest adding a new final row as follows:

  requires DAD               Yes                  Yes                   No                 N/A 

Meaning that multi-addresses configured by SLAAC or DHCPv6 IA_NA/IA_TA
must use DAD to check for duplicates on the link they were obtained. In a
multi-addressing environment where millions of addresses are required,
this could amount to a substantial amount of DAD multicast traffic. On the
other hand, DAD is not needed for DHCPv6 PD because the network has
unambiguously delegated the prefix for the node's exclusive use.

I have a question also on table 1. Under ""Unlimited" endpoints", why does
it say "no" for DHCPv6 PD? I think it should say "yes" instead, since a prefix
obtained by DHCPv6 PD can be used to configure an unlimited number of
addresses on the link over which the prefix was received.

Thanks - Fred
fred.l.templin@boeing.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Fred Baker (fred)
> Sent: Sunday, November 01, 2015 9:16 PM
> To: v6ops@ietf.org
> Subject: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-host-addr-availability discussion
> 
> In the discussion this morning, we wound up in a position that I could not call "consensus", even "rough consensus", but per a hum of
> those in the room, within shouting distance of achieving that. Several people spoke at the mike asking for a sentence or brief
> discussion to be added, or a section clarified.
> 
> In the interest of expediency, let me ask those who spoke (and anyone else that has an issue) to respond to this note (copying the
> list) with suggested text. It might be best if this is stated as
> 
> OLD TEXT
> the text that should be replaced goes here
> NEW TEXT
> the text that should replace it goes here
> 
> or
> 
> LOCATION
> identify the section the text should go into
> PROPOSED TEXT
> the text that should be added goes here
> 
> I'll permit the authors to declare suggested text out of scope; some of the discussion this morning left them commenting on scope
> and scope creep. However, I do ask them to justify the exclusion to the list, rather than just ignore the email.
> 
> This comment period ends 15 November.