IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Flash renumbering

otroan@employees.org Thu, 24 September 2020 19:32 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
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 5AFF23A124E for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 12:32:17 -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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 Y0shTz6vpDxQ for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 12:32:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from clarinet.employees.org (clarinet.employees.org [IPv6:2607:7c80:54:3::74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D743D3A1249 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 12:32:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from astfgl.hanazo.no (unknown [IPv6:2a01:79c:cebd:9724:19cd:88f:4689:25dc]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by clarinet.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D78994E11B4C; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 19:32:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by astfgl.hanazo.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C7A03E805F9; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 21:32:10 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\))
From: otroan@employees.org
In-Reply-To: <4749FF36-722C-4CB8-AAF8-800BA3BBD6EE@fugue.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 21:32:09 +0200
Cc: Philip Homburg <pch-v6ops-9@u-1.phicoh.com>, v6ops@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2AB3148B-5C56-4794-AF2B-6398643ECDA6@employees.org>
References: <CB2A165E-1EFD-44C8-AB14-58911F614007@employees.org> <4749FF36-722C-4CB8-AAF8-800BA3BBD6EE@fugue.com>
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/hKAikpA6DlPwloTKk5Gt8-VuKhA>
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: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 19:32:17 -0000

>> I see Ted is on an 8 year long loop. ;-)
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/oOZ8a1eEYkc0WoTuq917dzOn-fc/
> 
> Hey, don’t put it all on me. You were in that conversation too. History has shown pretty clearly that the complex and wonderful solution is a failure. PD is really simple, and not as good. But you can get CPE routers that do it.

But perhaps you could have taken a little more of the learnings from those homenet discussions to heart.
I don't think there is any purpose of rehashing that debate. Homenet had a very good look at it and reached it's conclusions.

People from Cablelabs were the ones who hashed out in most detail how DHCPv6 PD could work in such a scenario.
At least draft-gmann-homenet-relay-autoconf, possibly other drafts too.

Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email