IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] IANA assigned prefix for IPv6 benchmarking

Erik Kline <ek@google.com> Sun, 26 July 2015 16:22 UTC

Return-Path: <ek@google.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 126C81B2B97 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 26 Jul 2015 09:22:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.389
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.389 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 17jgeqJWKHNw for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 26 Jul 2015 09:22:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x22d.google.com (mail-wi0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22d]) (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 A1CEA1B2B99 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sun, 26 Jul 2015 09:22:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wibxm9 with SMTP id xm9so82849595wib.0 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sun, 26 Jul 2015 09:22:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=RLW6jvaYt6bEVx0LfES+WR0vEXx8RMxOD6ANHbKE2lM=; b=k3wKiTAPX/bcxEgshPnguvRfKxFQIB1YUTuWbMgTiRqY77SwXHt9kf7I8axzpFFVG0 vEfbnoI1E2EYGsdWZLXLVuLv9894Mm8wp3OmbM87wl/Uie/7Xb6IXz93elu0qJDZ5nVq 41aAnpjLuNJI/b0ymYjB8A3rF6K8nJV2J1mVaYU58h02FFRCdqjUcB505wf6AokR3ufX y9tCmRNpWIDGpGNxXZNoEYHLzjy/nRNwaPc5UY40PQhpsdYlfYtREh2pnDN2GSubSoak K9tNlwX59ELoVWOqHFpOnG0ylkYVcjUINRKRlsgm1CsAxH0c+VrfeLL7gNpFp01ohLXq 0f4g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=RLW6jvaYt6bEVx0LfES+WR0vEXx8RMxOD6ANHbKE2lM=; b=QW13qpBaxa8aM5c8dNPnrKWRaxOtDilV4BBXYzi32RO+UZ+gl2iI6f1stwRsDJj3PU Q6pNpKqRPj5JGGJdZs53BNAqxNIV/0nle4cT6A4xT4EtcEnXqCnDJh11WdhifdxrbSFM tJHpNRoyCHgr/Biu0V3eF2A41Vbk6JsLpazGRlLmloJpgRwKt84zRNgfqOKsqLi7DZsC QEnR3jvF/C7yo7c8hivi2wIlry5dYjmv4nxYiLtYOBirhfaZakxds2On3lY/DnlB6eD9 kZ8O2Sm53658/zips6kROytlpVvF5PS2tA3xL7TUu32arI67iYe7xZH3AECqb7n3uRZ6 lBPA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnIbgqceBUQCZxaZ0Ac0/p6+jO0sUTk4Q9BPnf3tEMIHURyaAo9EAsOJ0pOa/T6didoYgn6
X-Received: by 10.194.78.210 with SMTP id d18mr45015441wjx.34.1437927774183; Sun, 26 Jul 2015 09:22:54 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.28.138.203 with HTTP; Sun, 26 Jul 2015 09:22:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <55B48402.1040202@gmail.com>
References: <6b60e612c4f0.55b20091@naist.jp> <6c008406e2af.55b200cf@naist.jp> <6c00eec89ab8.55b2010d@naist.jp> <6bf095d99dae.55b2014a@naist.jp> <6b50ff96a9ad.55b20188@naist.jp> <6c50a92cde54.55b201c6@naist.jp> <6c50be138e83.55b20205@naist.jp> <6bf08db1e13f.55b20243@naist.jp> <6bf0f7dbdadf.55b20280@naist.jp> <6bf0898ffbd5.55b21ea8@naist.jp> <55B29026.1070906@gmail.com> <6b70d3cfd2f6.55b365ea@naist.jp> <6b70bfbf8107.55b36628@naist.jp> <6c30a2fefa4c.55b36666@naist.jp> <6c50d867e570.55b366a4@naist.jp> <6bf0c04ef47e.55b382fb@naist.jp> <55B48402.1040202@gmail.com>
From: Erik Kline <ek@google.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2015 18:22:34 +0200
Message-ID: <CAAedzxqK=tmVk0kQxF+FtmXPR68=faG8qadGgk6YpN95GGafUA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Stuart Cheshire <cheshire@apple.com>, David Schinazi <dschinazi@apple.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/dIypujw2SNkTyS7xDCGeg9IvS_s>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] IANA assigned prefix for IPv6 benchmarking
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Sun, 26 Jul 2015 16:22:57 -0000

On 26 July 2015 at 08:53, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 25/07/2015 22:37, GEORGESCU LIVIU MARIUS wrote:
>> If respecting the recommendations of RFC5180 is desired I think the following note in RFC5180 is relevant:
>>
>> " Note: Similar to RFC 2544(https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2544) avoiding the use of RFC 1918(https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1918) address space
>>  for benchmarking tests, this document does not recommend the use of RFC 4193(https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4193) [4(https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5180#ref-4)] (Unique Local Addresses) in order to minimize the
>>  possibility of conflicts with operational traffic."
>>
>> which in my understanding does not recommend the use of ULA s.
>
> No, but it's a strange argument precisely because ULAs are Unique with very high
> probability, so conflict with operational traffic is very improbable.

Regardless of ULA or some other space, I think a useful property for
the GUA(-like) prefix used by Apple's NAT64 test network would be
randomness.

If, for instance, *every time a NAT64 test network was started* a new
random ULA was generated or, say, 2001:2:0:$RAND16::/64 were used,
then developers would be less likely to accidentally make assumptions
about the consistency of addresses.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email