IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Flash renumbering

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Sat, 19 September 2020 06:19 UTC

Return-Path: <fgont@si6networks.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 A392C3A0D44 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 23:19:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.106 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 g2hBLxYDJgTt for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 23:19:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from skynet.si6networks.com (unknown [83.247.7.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A90653A0D43 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 23:19:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2800:810:464:1088:8aa:4c05:95c5:912] (unknown [IPv6:2800:810:464:1088:8aa:4c05:95c5:912]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by skynet.si6networks.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6C87D1F4F; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 03:19:06 -0300 (-03)
To: Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com>, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
References: <8f964b8650cd4b619ff47aed5b07bc67@huawei.com> <7ef6cbcc-164f-383c-658b-b3c0df859535@go6.si> <1af87e24-1410-8f89-b50d-9c61694e4644@foobar.org> <f97b7ac2-0b36-2fae-58fd-eddee6f8b408@gmail.com> <76f10fa7030044c4a0b71443fde92f24@huawei.com> <CAHL_VyC7u7bNJD9pUzbFTrBtifbCVmQtPn4YHHs5g7T6omKwLQ@mail.gmail.com> <2e11a0315196499c81b72c171e014650@huawei.com> <EB3611C3-8849-4670-AFAD-4924AC79E26A@fugue.com> <93e01391b78b4c19be87f58f68281cbf@huawei.com>
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Message-ID: <8ab49ae2-efd4-8760-a67a-ccb879053f87@si6networks.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2020 03:08:07 -0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <93e01391b78b4c19be87f58f68281cbf@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/TMy0PReYm6WHqItDHXuj9nYQOK4>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Flash renumbering
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: Sat, 19 Sep 2020 06:19:14 -0000

On 18/9/20 16:47, Vasilenko Eduard wrote:
>  From standard point of view
> 
> local traffic should not stop after CPE would lose uplink,
> 
> Because internal CPE switch should still switch traffic

GUAs are, for obvious reasons, topologically-dependent. Unless you have 
a static prefix assigned (and I mean static, not stable as in "generally 
stays the same), then when the uplink fails, it's conceptually wrong to 
keep using addresses that claim you're part of a network topology when 
you're not attached to such network in the first place.

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email