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 CA7C23A0E71 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 23:19:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 gUcI_-Rrkp_Y for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 23:19:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from skynet.si6networks.com (fernando.ipv6-lab.net [IPv6:2001:9e0:803:1::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 4318E3A0E2A for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 23:19:17 -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 EBAC71F54; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 03:19:14 -0300 (-03)
To: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
References: <f0d9ce6b-f917-cd3c-cd0d-e460d175ee6c@gmail.com> <1A960746-3BF4-4238-B314-1CA9198D452D@employees.org> <12138548-b098-15c6-fc6e-8518bdae6e90@gmail.com> <CABNhwV2r14wr7o2_0rOgvJSZHYj0ALaafZn94ud24+Vt_emThQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Message-ID: <231f4cd9-d66c-9eff-f9fe-78da563a4f91@si6networks.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2020 03:17:35 -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: <CABNhwV2r14wr7o2_0rOgvJSZHYj0ALaafZn94ud24+Vt_emThQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/VPv0Sf0jrQHo0tiVIvc8rHkzWRw>
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 06:19:26 -0000

On 18/9/20 23:29, Gyan Mishra wrote:
> 
> The whole issue with flash renumbering is related to PD.  Instead of 
> changing SLAAC to react better to flash renumbering event could we just 
> make PD sticky so it keeps your last prefix doled out similar to DHCPv4 
> where you get your last leased prefix.

It is not. Please check draft-ietf-v6ops-slaac-renum.


> Is that possible?

If your solution is about keeping additional state in the network, 
that's generally not much of a robust design. As much as it's good to 
improve the network, we do need smarts in the hosts. That's what leads 
to more robust network design.

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