Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-elkins-v6ops-multicast-virtual-nodes

Nalini Elkins <nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com> Sat, 20 September 2014 14:15 UTC

Return-Path: <nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D9AC1A0275 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 20 Sep 2014 07:15:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=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 jgM9XMv0czKU for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 20 Sep 2014 07:15:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nm18-vm4.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (nm18-vm4.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com [98.138.91.178]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C12C81A00B8 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 20 Sep 2014 07:15:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [98.138.100.103] by nm18.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 20 Sep 2014 14:15:48 -0000
Received: from [98.138.89.167] by tm102.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 20 Sep 2014 14:15:48 -0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1023.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 20 Sep 2014 14:15:48 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 673733.32517.bm@omp1023.mail.ne1.yahoo.com
Received: (qmail 24000 invoked by uid 60001); 20 Sep 2014 14:15:48 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1411222548; bh=3+9spr1WfpgCKHQn+5yvqsyV7o2815Bg1JcHXiiw+l8=; h=References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=xvkWoeFgMRnbc1By+0QbVkL1vX+n8YdAkZxcyJkshiv7oc1v5/eQu4fop46YmlO3sxcSsgfOeF0BxBNGpdOM0OWRlFY1tP8CIF9W7HdUNOoIDOetIAdn3SHqmQfeSpMvQ1QXUSCApVjaRH+wC5bT1QnX//7FJJiGeYTwPg8uu5Q=
X-YMail-OSG: Q2sOg9QVM1nmDppEeuXZJnhq9u7feA1nvB8ehh.Ri2Pz5kB Ja7vVFzIB5K4Tp2HIZVqakwyqFkCYuTxAisxBgKSg4wvbjAWIVR61BmN3PQP TlVS_9V10EqQ1zeBe818XYOwflN6xZrBTL2ClGbE.O2h2JqBF9_imZ4NC.nB QvRDhl8eTq.ZYoaNkYdv7OB0amD1x9T98Iy78QgGpZJUgsYzx8UPeVatgkeN 0B5vhbxN2MjwNOKjktN2R6tyQxnCqsTiLv0B4dW7zMIp_pRRTUDyRMJJHd6K SEKEu7VhrRVHp2.jTP9bFltt5xf0h0BsqZYGzUdw_9OO3itC7Hap6AUEXI3H CNyumurc0HFg6rr.2rsexhj65WBYsAwtXPJUza8kIglMBazp3Fw7SAB1rr_M Qr6tU4YV.kpZUuEAyoH2K3ptJ3hVd21lG0pmjv1mSqo0WtTw0mabl_abzQVo BK7xinB7wpop23IiFRvb2cZuFhEcRrfNcSbH.K4uv16D3lpV1WwvTnTJFI0h C_ZXUNQma4dIJtWe10oUW9YGeFgGaWZ_auaYWxsK7zhJN8uye
Received: from [24.130.244.175] by web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 20 Sep 2014 07:15:48 PDT
X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001, CgpPbiAyMC8wOS8yMDE0IDA0OjU0LCBOYWxpbmkgRWxraW5zIHdyb3RlOgo.IE9uIFdpbmRvd3MsIEkgZGlkIGEgOiAgcGluZyBmZjAyOjoxIC1uIDEwCj4KPiB3aGVyZSB0aGUgLW4gaXMgdGhlIGNvdW50Lgo.Cj4gU28gZm9yIGVhY2ggMSBwaW5nIHJlcXVlc3QgSSBzZW5kIG91dCwgZWFjaCBvZiBteSBuZWlnaGJvcnMgc2VuZHMgbWUgMTAKPiByZXNwb25zZXMuCgpUaGUgIi1uIiBwYXJhbWV0ZXIgc3BlY2lmaWVzIGhvdyBtYW55IGljbXAgZWNobyByZXF1ZXN0cyBhcmUgc2VudCBvdXQsIG5vdCAKaG93IG0BMAEBAQE-
X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.203.696
References: <201409191147.s8JBl1Fe016458@irp-lnx1.cisco.com> <CAPi140O_WkcS9uFCSK0+tVDF3Z1sB4_UF5Zv9kpNEMh7m94Vww@mail.gmail.com> <1411154671.21942.YahooMailNeo@web125102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <CAPi140Ob+TeDyYfw_1A2Q55gEF5-rNrLynQ1LkGHOVnGcNcpLA@mail.gmail.com> <1411164118.44574.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <CAPi140M+RjEr_edAXZBuUv9dYTztQUHq5J6rTd6Ca0qHcuhrCA@mail.gmail.com> <1411170563.16646.YahooMailNeo@web125101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <CAPi140PC_rjguOVpyes74=by-Y504hcpsbWFxVfQ8GiudbR6sA@mail.gmail.com> <1411185266.51203.YahooMailNeo@web125102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <541D45DB.5010703@foobar.org>
Message-ID: <1411222548.10128.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2014 07:15:48 -0700
From: Nalini Elkins <nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com>
To: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>, Andrew 👽 Yourtchenko <ayourtch@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <541D45DB.5010703@foobar.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="461871616-406499951-1411222548=:10128"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/b5-7lQLSQIZM8kZt6Tat2M_h15g
Cc: "draft-elkins-v6ops-multicast-virtual-nodes@tools.ietf.org" <draft-elkins-v6ops-multicast-virtual-nodes@tools.ietf.org>, "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-elkins-v6ops-multicast-virtual-nodes
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Nalini Elkins <nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com>
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: Sat, 20 Sep 2014 14:15:53 -0000


On 20/09/2014 04:54, Nalini Elkins wrote:
> On Windows, I did a :  ping ff02::1 -n 10
>
> where the -n is the count.
>
> So for each 1 ping request I send out, each of my neighbors sends me 10
> responses.

The "-n" parameter specifies how many icmp echo requests are sent out, not 
how many replies are solicited.

> Such as what?  BTW, I have sent Nick the trace & can send to you as well.

>The pcap file shows 10 icmp echo requests and 2840 echo replies, and that 
>the echo replies used 284 unique link-local ipv6 addresses associated with 
>284 unique MAC addresses.  This looks both correct and consistent with the 
>figures in the draft.  The lesson is that if you have a lot of ipv6 hosts 
>on the same broadcast domain, you will get lots of echo replies from a ping 
>to ff02::1.

This is the point we were trying to make.  But, we were using Ping to illustrate
that much layer 2 communication will occur - such as multicast.

Also, I was wrong in my explanation of multicast ping amplification.   How it
works is this:

Situation:  node A is on a subnet with 25 other nodes (B-Z)

1.  Node A sends 10 ICMP ping requests to FF02::1
2.  Nodes B through Z send Node A back ICMP 10 ping replies each

Impact: with very little work by Node A, he has made B - Z do work &
created network congestion with 250+ packets.

>Nalini, if you feel that there is an issue here, you should talk to your 

>hosting provider and suggest that they don't put as many ipv6 hosts on the 
>same broadcast domain.  This isn't a protocol level problem: it's expected 
>and correct behaviour.

I think people will be quite surprised at this behavior.   We think that the
issues of how many hosts are on a broadcast domain and node isolation
should be addressed.   We will add this to our draft.




Because It is not just ICMP but all link local and multicast communication.  I tell 
you, I do not think that people are not considering this in their network design.  
We are using the hosting company as an example of what really is happening in 
the wild.

Nick