Re: [v6ops] Clarification/addition on the cpe-slaac doc.

Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> Wed, 10 February 2021 15:09 UTC

Return-Path: <warren@kumari.net>
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 224523A0D3C for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 07:09:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.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 MUZzo3JdD4L7 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 07:09:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf1-x130.google.com (mail-lf1-x130.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::130]) (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 B8A253A0D38 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 07:09:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf1-x130.google.com with SMTP id f1so3407212lfu.3 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 07:09:52 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=yyGAvKFFWbuFjK31xqOq9Am5nr1HopU9junNOPXarWY=; b=JyNUqg8L6Gq7MkAJoSrY4669sG0nK1BXQ1Dduhsgjfx+4YQWKRPK3yPrNnrza1/cb4 oQ1wXgzsJ7RYp4ceYmZH705YVIoP67zD4DOjoBRjOvs4ChnfQznbJ322L/NjoR8g7fDE 4Sv0pftNoEo6UkvksPB/JQO3R47M2J5uEx1s69WJbvI6SXgLmRBDoBTVOqE1Zm+cRk+L yYV7Vrx5XmYq6S31YwDXYq6of/0dzOxbMGwS3lrAphtNM+WU47zUw/ZBOi4bmWP5yHIk FpmseCJz5nDK9oSBrCnvJJ8rRrLMyg3tJq+lQNQtfIIkaBizvH0B+54u6B+KTNs3ej53 XmSg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=yyGAvKFFWbuFjK31xqOq9Am5nr1HopU9junNOPXarWY=; b=KRXTZXCCIMOJnYga7I92RSCjvjf1swAUkveLqQJA9Idh2NWGd9l82qjqzEeDg/Xv7Q ey6DY7P3p841ZXM+Yc5SyLmnPEKThTJX0qLiQ2hUaIBNYDuClSZGKJG40OVxZ8LCOUOc 7JzzsLgit3av9y/NFSFbK8hL3dhY8zNA44Z3O8c7B7ceouxqEY6P8T7RWZfOHkiRf3Ih X+wl0IHUwP5+AWXvMb7h7uTS+2N/I1J64/Q+OGxZAnphPS2mGK/SHBdIRdfD8/G1UK+/ Jg+sAGydEHFnlscK3ED3pUgtxIKBcxlVXvcr//M30AoxejZ6HXgRVQd9aTnaKgAx5o32 bG0A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533szceCk+Me7eKoMAjQ/ppDkzgHLJpszIzkRuMCv6YA/scxSPJv Zt5D265UTjrUTg88H/VmgQyXsW9VuwTHnvkY/MaXcCxqMps8Rg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxjbrqQUwwTvHJJxmeAK+wikBWlGQNRW6PSFmgCaydJOtf9axuI+VhQtkB8OkMP+r5Hh8OJ0rMa198+4jGIjuQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:7f95:: with SMTP id a143mr1840599lfd.419.1612969790699; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 07:09:50 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAHw9_i+uALQiarCRs=m7rBNJ25R62PmRev2zHm+vZ=2VJw9yHw@mail.gmail.com> <888118D6-1F56-4ED3-9F3E-745DA9F590D8@employees.org>
In-Reply-To: <888118D6-1F56-4ED3-9F3E-745DA9F590D8@employees.org>
From: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 10:09:14 -0500
Message-ID: <CAHw9_iLxeJJ2nSki0mB6kc+VMP5j4RDtUnGd87KWC-20XzwtQg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
Cc: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006894ed05bafccbcc"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/YRCNc8AQ9EW2LOFek7-TMWmomhs>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Clarification/addition on the cpe-slaac doc.
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: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 15:09:54 -0000

On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 10:05 AM <otroan@employees.org> wrote:

> > During the final editing of cpe-slaac, the authors noticed that we
> should have included:
> > “WPD-10: CE routers SHOULD, by default, attempt to use a stable IAID
> value that does not change between CE restarts, DHCPv6 client restarts, or
> interface state changes. e.g., Transient PPP interfaces.”
> >
> > To me this seems like an obvious and non-contentious clarification (it's
> already required in RFC8145), and so I'm asking the authors to include it
> while addressing the other IESG comments/ballots.
>
> I think you mean 8415, but at least all the digits are there.
>

I did indeed :-)



> I support the change, but I do think it should be strengthened.
> An "unintended" change in IAID has dire consequences for the end-user
> network.
>
> "WPD-10: CE routers MUST by default use a stable IAID value that does not
> change between CE restarts, DHCPv6 client restarts, or interface state
> changes. e.g., Transient PPP interfaces."
>
> 8415 has: "For any given use of an IA by the client, the IAID for that IA
> MUST be consistent across restarts of the DHCP client."...
>

Fair enough. That's better, and the new proposed text; I actually intended
to copy and paste the RFC 8415 (see, I *can* type :-)) but forgot....
Thanks!
W



>
> Ole
>


-- 
The computing scientist’s main challenge is not to get confused by the
complexities of his own making.
  -- E. W. Dijkstra