IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] PI [ULA draft revision #2 Regarding isolated networks]

Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> Tue, 24 June 2014 16:40 UTC

Return-Path: <nick@foobar.org>
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 671721B2B5A for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 09:40:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham
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 nkgsM2-ia3jQ for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 09:40:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.netability.ie (mail.netability.ie [IPv6:2a03:8900:0:100::5]) (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 374AC1B2B49 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 09:40:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Envelope-To: v6ops@ietf.org
Received: from cupcake.foobar.org ([IPv6:2001:4d68:2002:100::110]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.netability.ie (8.14.9/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s5OGenxK090626 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 24 Jun 2014 17:40:49 +0100 (IST) (envelope-from nick@foobar.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: cheesecake.netability.ie: Host [IPv6:2001:4d68:2002:100::110] claimed to be cupcake.foobar.org
Message-ID: <53A9AA10.7080607@foobar.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 17:40:48 +0100
From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com>
References: <43BB867C-7BCA-45F6-8ADC-A49B34D6C0DC@nominum.com> <53865EA2.9000502@fud.no> <02dc01cf7c06$cc6a4bc0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <97390E9C-460F-4D08-AFCE-E4A991E2B0E4@cisco.com> <46D22F62-3528-4B9D-9FCF-C9C7466A9ABA@delong.com> <20140531104145.GQ46558@Space.Net> <m1WqqZ4-0000DqC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <20140531214908.10FEE1719BB4@rock.dv.isc.org> <m1WqrFK-0000BHC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <23125E9D-85A1-49EB-ACE6-DB5EAC67EE02@nominum.com> <CAKD1Yr0pvet1oOip-Y2Xi_h2mSZfW1R5HtfiAGbDEns0dY-d2A@mail.gmail.com> <2A4B72CD-EDF3-4D11-AC39-B65892F9173F@nominum.com> <CAKD1Yr2NH4Kca4EvhjN2XnDbt8F2eS56ipxu3npH9yOh1bmQaA@mail.gmail.com> <F12F173B-9FF2-4EF8-B11E-33AEDA24961F@nominum.com> <20140602013829.875B917236AC@rock.dv.isc.org> <53A843C9.1040002@gmail.com> <70F894D7-8701-420F-B16F-F8EAF3AE276F@nominum.com> <53A94E88.6070101@foobar.org> <20140624101957.DBF2A192F4EE@rock.dv.isc.org> <53A95539.6080901@foobar.org> <539A0F8F-8B18-40CE-A39F-F83448E41B63@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <539A0F8F-8B18-40CE-A39F-F83448E41B63@nominum.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/jo7fgwTWFEfoCEaAxRzsq0TSvQg
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v6ops] PI [ULA draft revision #2 Regarding isolated networks]
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: <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: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 16:40:55 -0000

On 24/06/2014 16:55, Ted Lemon wrote:
> Nick, it's certainly "supported," but it's not configured automatically
> (nor is there a standard mechanism for doing so), and it doesn't support
> multihoming or intelligent source address selection.

you still haven't defined what you mean by multihoming in this context.

ipv4 source address selection is handled by vendor implementations and the
ietf has no particular guidelines on how it should be managed.  Possibly
there is a correlation between these two things.

Nick

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email