IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] DHCPv6/SLAAC Make Hosts Confusing-//RE: new draft: draft-liu-bonica-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem

Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> Mon, 28 October 2013 20:05 UTC

Return-Path: <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
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 EE8A311E819F for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:05:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bRjl4KJ4ikqJ for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:05:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE9D911E81DE for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:05:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r9SK5ZFZ002430; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 20:05:35 GMT
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk r9SK5ZFZ002430
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=201304; t=1382990735; bh=A0T+CrnNazxuQ080cHyzbPhFWQI=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=2BUu5+0CKLLzjZQq5oVjjuvRZWqb6jPAmWmEhwwH2wAjSaUucolNOxS/xK4A9UI42 Feh1CXP5AxwVMkyks58VIF2GKkTSznsbL3z9WXYvyodlzlApXJv/9QDM/5Lu4cC2eO ucv/ENmOBDyj6MkTK3vOEDZG59X1Z65Q5buUSnwI=
Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25d]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) envelope-from <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> with ESMTP (valid=N/A) id p9RK5Z0959629084FY ret-id none; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 20:05:35 +0000
Received: from [192.168.1.108] (host213-123-213-183.in-addr.btopenworld.com [213.123.213.183]) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r9SK4GdN008429 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 28 Oct 2013 20:04:16 GMT
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_123E849A-A6F9-4BC6-AD7A-E79C97A966EE"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1816\))
From: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr2tpD71716gnGjVpvOczEeAXGxL=AJVyUV1_L_92y27Hg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 20:04:13 +0000
Message-ID: <EMEW3|b4b60cee19a4f9abf9a17cb9726303e2p9RK5Z03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|31841FF0-A7ED-468A-9589-959989C2303F@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
References: <52689EE0.3030201@inex.ie> <CE8E29EC.59EE4%victor@jvknet.com> <CAKD1Yr0ky0SSrhYz9R82bTO+GhrsBVL-_Uf-9sbYuLWKYpmi0Q@mail.gmail.com> <FC34B2F1-AC53-4B9C-8ED4-A5FAFC862DFB@conjury.org> <73493F7B-5284-4EC8-8F72-922C68AE6FA3@nominum.com> <CAKD1Yr2tpD71716gnGjVpvOczEeAXGxL=AJVyUV1_L_92y27Hg@mail.gmail.com> <31841FF0-A7ED-468A-9589-959989C2303F@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1816)
X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
X-smtpf-Report: sid=p9RK5Z095962908400; tid=p9RK5Z0959629084FY; client=relay,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=3:0; fails=0
X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: r9SK5ZFZ002430
X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Cc: V6OPS Working Group <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] DHCPv6/SLAAC Make Hosts Confusing-//RE: new draft: draft-liu-bonica-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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 2013 20:05:47 -0000

On 28 Oct 2013, at 17:45, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 2:39 AM, Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> wrote:
> FWIW, RFC 3736 was updated eight years ago with RFC 4242, which provides an information refresh timer.   If you aren't currently implementing that, you should.   Unfortunately the working group didn't think to actually say that 4242 updates 3736, so I'm not surprised if it's not on peoples' radar.
> 
>  With a minimum of 10 minutes, unfortunately.

At the time, 10 minutes was significantly better than infinity.  It was somewhat arbitraily picked.

The concern was a very low value could cause significant load on the stateless dhc server.

The use case that drove RFC4242 was renumbering; we went through the RFC4192 process, and this was a glaring gap.

Tim

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email