Re: [v6ops] Flash renumbering

Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com> Fri, 18 September 2020 22:32 UTC

Return-Path: <markzzzsmith@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 630C03A09B0 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 15:32:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.65
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.65 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM=0.001, HK_RANDOM_FROM=0.946, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 5wWK_Zg1W2Gd for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 15:32:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi1-x236.google.com (mail-oi1-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::236]) (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 769203A0995 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 15:32:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi1-x236.google.com with SMTP id x14so8896527oic.9 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 15:32:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=t70+hZBzsjEBUkrHWS0jV0R8PO/tbKGm2lA5iZnESwo=; b=QV6LpyZqTC9B+LIgz7nkjTGPVB4MAfBXbOOjZf4VOCIBHXjUghbDr0ZtaHoqknPzZa Y+0A0tUdXoS06Kym2A45PF2xCYu6/F39VH13xnDzns7tiiIrMKgBoK9SdxGw99HjvcUw JSbLnNDqKSVmmb9kvyVU3zSVhGupd6ZqmP4HyfJnLXRQyxYZ9pSa2zKT42upVDc3emf+ O7eKuxFpwrzVeHb1Kuqhrrhm1QQ/jzDo9Jhvh13ErxLMV8DYVNgMHIIE9i99SdNB2i3G av8WhBf4yTO7qTVG25KbtmKKuBeH1qf80g7YXjcDZpbFEdZgU20OWWpE+ELnSP7alhYF Wp/g==
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=t70+hZBzsjEBUkrHWS0jV0R8PO/tbKGm2lA5iZnESwo=; b=Kv/yDa6PtmMRJk8vjEK/ngMnsBl5TKYr+GUSmrtHRt4KM6rwgmZhmOaHwR1ZkoPWrQ Tb7fhGfC01gAvegl4WgT5WEnxRY81eB3yIZg+q1iMq7j5YMUpWym8ukyIaUPwwTsQXaG p6QlaybJ2rxroF7M8P9KXCba1nlNZUj4nMbGVSXh1ATWxDMepZwY+IiE/LOGnW2+NmzT s6Et8ER3N2vpXQ4333iCiw92GfF4L5atDjhWZujdFrvQU/hqYxaXMwvVewx6KBbYMdaR cmHqt4BkKXR5xiv2dytNfGVHE7kjTXGy0Ffi/29N5eeJk2XKGHVhIYQZ/BUBHDiYtatA gBNA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531xyGpHNbjPRSuZU8mAf1LfQENPFeY4y+LBYt/KvN0ikxsOo1e1 I0MvKs7yqCuwgj+vuwSDkE5w3NcImY8ec2fwSuM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJySBOZlW0ho+k5L1m2u6cQGpPVWEwkFdNYXbcUbVeaHhdrC4XBeoWz6SeI3Zrnx6rjZTPNzwYdumQdOb5gh2Ss=
X-Received: by 2002:aca:b206:: with SMTP id b6mr9871159oif.54.1600468361654; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 15:32:41 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <f0d9ce6b-f917-cd3c-cd0d-e460d175ee6c@gmail.com> <1A960746-3BF4-4238-B314-1CA9198D452D@employees.org>
In-Reply-To: <1A960746-3BF4-4238-B314-1CA9198D452D@employees.org>
From: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2020 08:32:30 +1000
Message-ID: <CAO42Z2ynazscaquOnK3S2ASpXbw-=f0wKcMZfYqdHtFWNL5S3w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, v6ops list <v6ops@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002bb84705af9e1461"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/_n1swPbzvkm_-U0v_Piv3G0rjGg>
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: Fri, 18 Sep 2020 22:32:44 -0000

On Sat, 19 Sep 2020, 07:21 Ole Troan, <otroan@employees.org> wrote:

>
>
> > On 18 Sep 2020, at 22:57, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On 19-Sep-20 05:11, Gyan Mishra wrote:
> >>
> >> All
> >>
> >> I really still feel this use case being Broadband provider PD related
> stale prefix issue  is really a corner case for SOHO users
> >
> > Why is that a "corner case"? We can count SOHO networks by the hundreds
> of millions, compared with enterprise networks in millions. They both
> matter, but SOHOs are about two orders of magnitude greater in number.
>
> Corner case because Service Providers generally do not flash renumber
> their customers.
>

As IP addresses are currently used as locators, flash renumbering is really
flash moving hosts to another point of attachment to the network.

Dynamic addresses don't align with the reality that the customers' layer 2
point of attachment to the network (and geographic location) doesn't
normally change.

Regards,
Mark.





> Cheers
> Ole
>
>
> >
> >   Brian
> >
> >> as it does not impact enterprises with manually configured stable
> prefix which is 100% of the enterprise dual stack use case.
> >>
> >> From an operations impact there is considerable monetary impact to
> enterprises if the IPv6 standards change proposed by flash renumbering
> does not take into account the  enterprise stable prefix scenario that does
> not fall into this one size fits all bucket being proposed.
> >>
> >> I am worried about adverse effects of the changes being proposed to
> SLAAC standard that could impact enterprises.  We just need to be very
> careful that every used case out there is accounted for.
> >>
> >> Gyan
> >>
> >> On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 11:56 AM Richard Patterson <
> richard@helix.net.nz <mailto:richard@helix.net.nz>> wrote:
> >>
> >>    On Fri, 18 Sep 2020 at 08:05, Vasilenko Eduard <
> vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com <mailto:vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >>        Hi Brian,
> >>
> >>
> >>> SLAAC is only one of the victims of flash renumbering. (If there was
> more
> >>
> >>
> >>> widespread use of ULAs that might not be true.)
> >>
> >>
> >>        [Ed: ] But How? Subscriber needs access to Global Internet.
> >>
> >>
> >>        Is it possible to connect Google by ULA?
> >>
> >>
> >>    Well if ULAs were used more often for local connectivity, they
> wouldn't be impacted by an outage of the WAN interface causing the GUA
> prefix to change.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>    _______________________________________________
> >>
> >>    v6ops mailing list
> >>
> >>    v6ops@ietf.org <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
> >>
> >>    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> <http://www.verizon.com/>
> >>
> >> *Gyan Mishra*
> >>
> >> /Network Solutions A//rchitect /
> >>
> >> /M 301 502-1347
> >> 13101 Columbia Pike
> >> /Silver Spring, MD
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> v6ops mailing list
> >> v6ops@ietf.org
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > v6ops mailing list
> > v6ops@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>