[v6ops] Neighbor Cache Entries on First-Hop Routers: New Drafts Posted.
Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com> Mon, 28 October 2019 09:31 UTC
Return-Path: <furry13@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 BEF2A120103; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 02:31:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 r7T6IXNHUP-H; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 02:31:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk1-x734.google.com (mail-qk1-x734.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::734]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 308AD1200DF; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 02:31:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk1-x734.google.com with SMTP id e66so7809582qkf.13; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 02:31:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=ZsfoTri+5RmuEWnXa8NEkpnjjUfsYNULqEX9YGLDxHM=; b=LD3bGJMBUwdKmJ2IJnKtY+RL7lYAELGyGg6HtBnVnwfp+4DZ+CqUWpmhGh/s6LSsSY 6orlCpUTShCGLOVPzoB1Xh+PxWUFosqhcLTliejGGm9LSN4/IQm55EgzX2LnziEiiAC5 e64c0itlktIg5UcqYPts+gZHJCXfz8/5o/Os821PLSIKR4pRdR+V5Vkc2xBWGNptQCPB YIp/tdB5zkmdcHyssu5JCPywTKK0mhYWhupb3oTBQEWocZbgNuu797s5RwiM/lHnC0B2 z6PW8VGPKPxAhXwOLMgmOFXG8Wgs3nm6Gh+bQDEZCptC7aWR/y9hjziKbUAPeS4uvphL KSBg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=ZsfoTri+5RmuEWnXa8NEkpnjjUfsYNULqEX9YGLDxHM=; b=oMo9D/7Zg2W0kMiVyNDhjex/RZ14G3dbjyJRzdzwn968itVITWfc2a5QnRuxqdH8Mk 0n0lPgzepP3hWjc4ofnCGvH733VpzhFRQbmyanDiecuTDZGuE013Gu4wTM9R8R2YidmR aNe6tTvoyjl0wu0tKYqY1DqXiS0mJbj8C/UW8WPLhdlny5sei94oRMFF0ktX21cD4ORS 4eHWenF9XvMI1mVCFuHQAsW1zsFqoI1FbzPFycUDBcOZiv1+F3EzjLI7jcWy24ipZ66O elYBn7SO/iBhGHr8aEZQPLRY/9GGaxrlM4ucqOAu3d3m45srUZUvaZtoVf0zwhIHOtQx jfKg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWH/LciuEcq9RZf/LFzM+3T0jbZUT/DrpZHlBpGCp68BsIy8cve yem5Sms1G6jgWXHZfp+pbFamlkC/szuz/xGlPVdyzteg
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxUETE7WP203HK5/fwFxtcNIEKPaoJcF/MMTJVjeDRstCdGavjBcPmUkutVu/cFxcM4OhwAjHVR7Q3lnfidAWQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a37:2f42:: with SMTP id v63mr14724972qkh.277.1572255108645; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 02:31:48 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 20:31:37 +1100
Message-ID: <CAFU7BARHWyqPrkNdEG+MgCp26aS31T2pcF8BabB=2MGRqqrHTw@mail.gmail.com>
To: V6 Ops List <v6ops@ietf.org>, 6man <6man@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/VeADFMhu4Pe-wC5-ciiIOBgn_-k>
Subject: [v6ops] Neighbor Cache Entries on First-Hop Routers: New Drafts Posted.
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: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 09:31:52 -0000
Hello, During v6ops session at IETF105 it was suggested that in addition to https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-linkova-v6ops-nd-cache-init/ another draft is required, for 6man, which would summarise the proposed changes to RFC4861. So here we are: I've just submitted two drafts: 1) https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-nd-cache-init-00 - the v6ops@ WG document which is replacing draft-linkova-v6ops-nd-cache-init. The draft discussed the operational issues, various approaches to solve the problem and proposed solution. The proposed changes to RFC4861 is described in 2) https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-linkova-6man-grand-00 Any comments/suggestions are appreciated. I'm still not sure if it's the best way to split those drafts. Known Issues: draft-linkova-6man-grand: Pls ignore the sentence in the Abstract which suggests updating RFC4862/RFC4429. I do not think it's necessary (but I might be wrong indeed). -- SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry