Re: [v6ops] SLAAC renum: Problem Statement & Operational workarounds

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Wed, 30 October 2019 12:33 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.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 6773F12013D for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Oct 2019 05:33:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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=fugue-com.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 n0XpXrtRlhQI for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Oct 2019 05:33:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt1-x834.google.com (mail-qt1-x834.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::834]) (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 61CF812013C for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Oct 2019 05:33:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt1-x834.google.com with SMTP id x21so2881641qto.12 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Oct 2019 05:33:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=bgwDL4KgFq8YIinDVk88cDLbiIhgtuCx77pouS/6Hcg=; b=f6AGheDW1NbFEcZG0GEl0wTOzRcIni1Hgs+dDNvIl/8Ghsb5xlVOIZL6YWUb32HpOK plbYtK3cF9o5oyzm1x9KVAvAaukCLGTo5/cFrGAXCN0o06rG0Pz1ofGDsMjVH9LBssav R+RKCIGIRXuXwGtQkMLBFeIANhdld0SDPoXESV3sHhgaIzvgD0Q+ojmYYI1KOfKwYYkL dq41REmRCCuVorNc51zc86rnMjNPycH5pTQsEmENXkBbXZWcxcPMlWr5sioyOLsu9f6f zpS5keboBmapIQEfyMgHNIH7jhz0yCbQ3s6rvyEJeSsxiGt1UQtLY1ghseujk2xCOipn 5A0Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=bgwDL4KgFq8YIinDVk88cDLbiIhgtuCx77pouS/6Hcg=; b=PsCWHqa0jVVzlFpi736wyWR2F1yDbuSAprFSViFUCi+a2fYcie3/zthkL1e248Tw7l FGgRhkZ+eKSp90gJYngxj4nbByhXTQ4eYe1IpryaHnhfEXhicoC0bgiQUWhM4UVS/cr1 igW2jOID3FZw5CCaNKUYwjG00OouD/LGvmHeQhoXOOTw1jCdl7p4e6xX/MUkIAG2LALh q8gbx2UEGtMTqrICThirMW0vA5ihYI2bhHZdpAcBXhl6sKtxIwhDwaBqA/B0iKbBRgki fFMxTf+106V+3ghaxbDE0CHjYAn6IK/waen51/qpf78kwGe7fcE5h4iGPj9kA9Vw483y L/tA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWc7waQHCg6BC3dL1/SmCzEbEo0JZkUa++xsB6GA+IXSWm3aBud HUBDOpvu6nAB3gaqWsA8viFZBQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxGJDYgUY6oatjWECBOpa6lpoHF0TdmZVBv7EUJFAXxkL4r4tjAFVW0qzpxdCEk+OK/sFddeQ==
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:56ab:: with SMTP id bd11mr21030398qvb.237.1572438780489; Wed, 30 Oct 2019 05:33:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:18b:300:36ee:a4bd:5a89:da31:d7c4? ([2601:18b:300:36ee:a4bd:5a89:da31:d7c4]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k187sm1205888qkb.20.2019.10.30.05.32.59 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 30 Oct 2019 05:32:59 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2019 08:32:59 -0400
Message-Id: <0F0B6068-CA62-449B-B56E-78E9EF8D998E@fugue.com>
References: <CAOSSMjVhK_V4HpMzprOyo9pj=ysFef+uZUs=twd_zfPaBdPu3Q@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAOSSMjVhK_V4HpMzprOyo9pj=ysFef+uZUs=twd_zfPaBdPu3Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Timothy Winters <twinters@iol.unh.edu>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (17B78)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/gtlpvNlHhXf6UXBnlxoNM2R1nTM>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] SLAAC renum: Problem Statement & Operational workarounds
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, 30 Oct 2019 12:33:03 -0000

On Oct 30, 2019, at 08:30, Timothy Winters <twinters@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
> Yes we have a couple of test cases for IPv6 Ready CE Router Logo that confirms this behavior.  One focuses on "Prefix Change" or what your calling Flash renumber.  I will note this is a common failure the first time devices fail.

Thanks for the info!  Which behavior do you mean?  There’s the handling of pd, and then there’s the icmp response.