Re: [v6ops] Scope of Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses (Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gont-6man-ipv6-ula-scope-00.txt)

David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu> Sun, 14 February 2021 00:46 UTC

Return-Path: <farmer@umn.edu>
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 1AA1F3A11AE for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 16:46:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, 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=umn.edu
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 102EToJR4s2i for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 16:46:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mta-p8.oit.umn.edu (mta-p8.oit.umn.edu [134.84.196.208]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A53D3A11E7 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 16:46:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mta-p8.oit.umn.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DdT7J3GnSz9vC7n for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sun, 14 Feb 2021 00:46:04 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at umn.edu
Received: from mta-p8.oit.umn.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mta-p8.oit.umn.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VeJZaSpZdZwT for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 18:46:04 -0600 (CST)
Received: from mail-ed1-f69.google.com (mail-ed1-f69.google.com [209.85.208.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mta-p8.oit.umn.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DdT7H75kZz9vC7f for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 18:46:03 -0600 (CST)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mta-p8.oit.umn.edu 4DdT7H75kZz9vC7f
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mta-p8.oit.umn.edu 4DdT7H75kZz9vC7f
Received: by mail-ed1-f69.google.com with SMTP id a20so2774255edx.14 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 16:46:02 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=umn.edu; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ByqJRAmSz0VPcFcKThI9x5GfsTCJOCNd6b6PD/J+K3g=; b=gQHZAQndwrdJlUeVlHgtAAVe0i5agqBvMsnBAyDpggBiEjfSV5V5eCYpten0Ume0yt FAwO3IN5v70hJO1OLtet8+LkhUJO5r6n6MIOGy5wcsMJPAcn2MK3Wt5TNt8MFiE+/pFL hSNEQb41ue0YMM1SW8eVAdBmqagtXvlAyxh/fhgubMfeJjAuinD9dfuSXBOrZps03WuL 49lhwxpOxO1RbE1AtUQAueukpOLrsWTSw4s5Froj4BR/GFpeCYt7JwfadBMC3onDB1Hv 9C8akf3PvcF6Pg1ZPmIlBrXRVVjG2KSxWbIXOQpUeH5QkEZBWXU4FFTPc3x4Bcc7QNDr zglA==
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=ByqJRAmSz0VPcFcKThI9x5GfsTCJOCNd6b6PD/J+K3g=; b=etJT7deTpqNmtVUJ16DGZoA2my85XZPlbSGh+j80n5Wi+rZm+PNFbAYxSElpA/S8r9 sP5IT2mzLqqhHqHnbqUsM+2pqCnX3UrH/FcDJQvfSJ9Mt5nApRkdvnOV+fkKnTfdq32W kCSQ1JLOasY6FsHe+YQzLVa0aVJeO69vKwEfx7YzOLmPTgF+khcn8YUq9wD2rLfQgchj ud1UpQWptevsQMkDbUR/nile/bc1vNl7fb03iljA3Px8MQM73/Mpuhvh/cHOE65e6/MT muPl2s0KBQT+GJNASqD8b9H/Xu9V/PXaBMfQ2QcdFa6+AB8kb4+0dgjQarna11jrPJNg TO6g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532GZWYDeM3NdCc3qZdfZnVqeiV44s3+ZaNygVJVTRn1SrmiINuf nnfvs6gHKNJeCX0pOx8uPfJcBOo7qwQKC74yemgNpfeRylcnzk89m92tyMM0GUPJuvOuEyOyW0W o9VOEynpykxy5gWdoRYGd68+Y7w==
X-Received: by 2002:a50:e14d:: with SMTP id i13mr9478582edl.106.1613263561536; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 16:46:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwjrsCEe3oz86X73nMJpNZOxJntgsYdGYlWiDXq094snU7ZHdpTvb8RgzR1ETYOICHNR2KdKbQt/pI0s2CiyzE=
X-Received: by 2002:a50:e14d:: with SMTP id i13mr9478565edl.106.1613263561129; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 16:46:01 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <160989494094.6024.7402128068704112703@ietfa.amsl.com> <6fe3a45e-de65-9f88-808d-ea7e2abdcd16@si6networks.com> <F4E00812-E366-4520-AE17-7BB46E28D575@gmail.com> <CAN-Dau3iOjjU+FLpdtA7nqfKRX+sjjSanAU8U-O3pH-k5nSoig@mail.gmail.com> <a3fbfb94-90ae-961c-a2ab-33ade27e074e@si6networks.com> <672bd5e6-bdce-5915-1082-1ed30d3c5980@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <672bd5e6-bdce-5915-1082-1ed30d3c5980@gmail.com>
From: David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu>
Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2021 18:45:45 -0600
Message-ID: <CAN-Dau1CvbwZccq2Zyr8xBkiW1z0nKX_YcGW-y3VL7=pm+wA+w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Cc: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>, "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007d9e9405bb41311d"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/ekzFbOVZQDfbLhNT1ybnfPuVuSw>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Scope of Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses (Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gont-6man-ipv6-ula-scope-00.txt)
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: Sun, 14 Feb 2021 00:46:07 -0000

On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 3:17 PM Brian E Carpenter <
brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 13-Feb-21 22:19, Fernando Gont wrote:
> ...
> > Well, whether we call it out or not, as per RFC4007:
> >
> >                scope(LL) < scope(ULA) < scope(GUA)
>
> And there's the fallacy. This inequality only makes sense if reachability
> is strictly a matter of concentric circles. It isn't. Nice math, but not
> reality.
>
> Slide 4 of https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~brian/scope6.pdf
>
>    Brian
>

I think I'm hearing,

1. Rewrite RFC4007 to only discuss zone indexes for the Link-Local address
on an interface, maybe rename then too. Junk the rest, it only confuses
things.

2. Rewrite RFC4291 to only refer to Link Scope (for Link-Local Addresses
and the Loop-Back Address) and Global Scope for all other Unicast addresses
except the unspecified address, eliminate all inference to other unicast
scopes and the size of scopes. All uniqueness for Link-Local address comes
from IID uniqueness provided by DAD, and there should be no discussion of
uniqueness regarding Global Scope in RFC4291, it is only discussed in
RFC4007. Also, eliminate the discussion of IID scope. Leaving Multicast
scope alone.

However, unless we can agree on how to deal with the 64-bit boundary, or
not to touch it, touching RFC4291 will only end in flames.

Is it possible to do anything with RFC4007 without ending in flames?

-- 
===============================================
David Farmer               Email:farmer@umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE        Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================