IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Making RDNSS a MUST?

Tim Chown <Tim.Chown@jisc.ac.uk> Tue, 04 April 2017 08:55 UTC

Return-Path: <tim.chown@jisc.ac.uk>
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 ABB83127058 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 01:55:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.319
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.319 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=jisc.ac.uk
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 ZKSzRFCEKjoy for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 01:55:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eu-smtp-delivery-189.mimecast.com (eu-smtp-delivery-189.mimecast.com [207.82.80.189]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A0F171273B1 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 01:55:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=jisc.ac.uk; s=mimecast20170213; t=1491296101; bh=25u+2CJDkgX7CskDVctgkZE4ydsgK5SjBPcOZrCgN2A=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Htf1iCE2tj9FX3rkouVqB6t2bYjHYC7U0hCwn4Txasx3ItEV7So7STPtL8xtWjoQ7MViUgofDePzDripFYAkQ10PEdOCpwX4s8/lOAuOgE2m7j+It7+DNgpWRALMkOO/5SkSj/+pJ9VSicKD4dz9EPDl5/jxhjDq2yiGuMHbk0Y=
Received: from EUR01-VE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-ve1eur01lp0242.outbound.protection.outlook.com [213.199.154.242]) (Using TLS) by eu-smtp-1.mimecast.com with ESMTP id uk-mta-72-g3C-CmY8OYKcfzXW2QDAYg-1; Tue, 04 Apr 2017 09:54:57 +0100
Received: from AM3PR07MB1140.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.163.188.14) by AM3PR07MB1139.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.163.188.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1019.8; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 08:54:56 +0000
Received: from AM3PR07MB1140.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::29d9:4eb6:edcf:55dc]) by AM3PR07MB1140.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::29d9:4eb6:edcf:55dc%14]) with mapi id 15.01.1019.014; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 08:54:56 +0000
From: Tim Chown <Tim.Chown@jisc.ac.uk>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
CC: Philip Homburg <pch-v6ops-7@u-1.phicoh.com>, "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] Making RDNSS a MUST?
Thread-Index: AQHSqOFocyuY5KS/Ck2Z1SdTJY6HuaGuSN8AgABDRwCAA/sWgIAAKaaAgAANfgCAAAjfgIAABE4AgAA2LICAAKwLgIAAA6UAgAAV4ICAAA0U4IAADhwAgAEOBoA=
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2017 08:54:56 +0000
Message-ID: <DBB85084-EA1E-4909-9E5E-34C835B201C0@jisc.ac.uk>
References: <CAKD1Yr2FMvpgjSPv-1cdWQGTFzB8oRCvm=57MgOv=tH11awpOA@mail.gmail.com> <6778e48f-250e-30ca-6d57-a8d87c8f0dd6@dougbarton.us> <73E59C4C-AC31-4456-B807-CE92490A5D51@thehobsons.co.uk> <7063c729-70f5-40b0-51b2-1d89bb28d7c0@dougbarton.us> <DE5EF8D8-A1FF-4CAF-A0D8-6AAF60FBD4E8@delong.com> <ec45051d-caf4-0675-f696-711dea582dbd@dougbarton.us> <bc6862bf-0cff-dc78-bd54-a5d85771c4dd@gmail.com> <2ff28a1e-f11f-b924-8105-4f4de4e1804a@dougbarton.us> <CAKD1Yr17EL2zv7REPxT5UM9bO7A4io7F0v995JDEULZM_n_exg@mail.gmail.com> <a844c9e3-0f72-6353-5634-a380bb1850ed@gmail.com> <58E253B4.9010501@foobar.org> <CAO42Z2zi4rBZ1QCJ9MBQnvXJX1_1QpMQphT7Nxbo4QB1Jxot5w@mail.gmail.com> <m1cv4MA-0000HqC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1704031844212.27978@uplift.swm.pp.se>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1704031844212.27978@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-originating-ip: [194.82.140.195]
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; AM3PR07MB1139; 7:bzd/6zqgtQDEbmHNnpyAFHk5SydBqArCu3OynWaMplnGt3ytHQJe+DlN2Lwls7MkrNgMVxQq/UYFZ5cQuAfhL59qK4uUkbNPkYhk0TUXHSgM5oh9TRwyayplT/IwVUb8w9A7PGK2Bo5Nbrp3QF4nKpVlNRZucz0QJdvKL1qOhgiYWk5/xndhj4wRzZE0dowLMP48b8B5X8C9qNFBZWyKzrlbrJaR1MPNDAWp/5SeM75pa/VE4QB0waUjXegUVEtZr++zi3K23udL2F8xcCv5xT9F0urdRFV0nTsvSLhjumKTM5cQiwazWisyZeUiPpZ5Zr6t3R0VLrUjlk2mbRiGWQ==; 20:Vc87Ked0EQwHzF2mB/ebFGFLGKsUjfDNvNxIBSDY25BYrmsG6BbXQyPkB4YxwsaKY3l4qbw1Y9ODi+IO4ey5ZFPlQoJ+OerrY3CSy3ZZ7Ne0qU5Do3i1Yv+PjsH0GYP0oZgDSCEib7ARF983F1wPAVvLprRoCnB2J36/HWiYzm8=
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 2cce87e1-aaaa-4134-5470-08d47b38447b
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(22001)(2017030254075)(201703131423075)(201703031133081); SRVR:AM3PR07MB1139;
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <AM3PR07MB113912FBAE2DB5FC3C6DC855D60B0@AM3PR07MB1139.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040450)(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001)(10201501046)(93006095)(93001095)(6041248)(20161123560025)(20161123555025)(20161123564025)(201703131423075)(201702281529075)(201702281528075)(201703061421075)(20161123562025)(6072148); SRVR:AM3PR07MB1139; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:AM3PR07MB1139;
x-forefront-prvs: 0267E514F9
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(39410400002)(39400400002)(39840400002)(39450400003)(24454002)(53546009)(25786009)(8676002)(81166006)(189998001)(50226002)(83716003)(6246003)(82746002)(2950100002)(50986999)(74482002)(6916009)(76176999)(42882006)(7906003)(33656002)(53936002)(7736002)(93886004)(8936002)(2900100001)(57306001)(4326008)(66066001)(2906002)(110136004)(38730400002)(3280700002)(3660700001)(36756003)(6306002)(5250100002)(99286003)(229853002)(3846002)(5660300001)(236005)(6436002)(54896002)(6512007)(6506006)(606005)(102836003)(6486002)(86362001)(54906002)(6116002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:AM3PR07MB1139; H:AM3PR07MB1140.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en;
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: jisc.ac.uk
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 04 Apr 2017 08:54:56.2429 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 48f9394d-8a14-4d27-82a6-f35f12361205
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AM3PR07MB1139
X-MC-Unique: g3C-CmY8OYKcfzXW2QDAYg-1
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DBB85084EA1E49099E5E34C835B201C0jiscacuk_"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/p8Fb899zZO0YS5EnEqYpLUNWTq4>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Making RDNSS a MUST?
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Tue, 04 Apr 2017 08:55:07 -0000

On 3 Apr 2017, at 17:48, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se<mailto:swmike@swm.pp.se>> wrote:

Whenever I ask to extend ND or put new things into RA, I get lots of pushback. A lot more pushback than when I want a new DHCP option for something that relates to information for the device.

Yet we have RFC7710 as recently as December 2015, which allows any URI to be plugged into an RA - https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7710#section-2.3.  I was pretty surprised this one got adopted.

The only major pushback that I have seen to put into DHCPv6 is the default router option for DHCPv6, because if we allow that then I would say that there are lots of other options in RA not currently available in DHCPv6 that I would basically say should be MTI. These are for instance MTU, PIOs with lifetimes etc.

Have you read https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-droms-dhc-dhcpv6-default-router-00 ?  This was written by Ralph in 2009, but encountered rough seas soon after sailing from port. But there was no shortage of people on that boat.

I think saying everything should be configurable using DHCP is short-sighted and removes a lot of the new functionality that IPv6 actually supports in current incarnation, that IPv4 currently doesn’t.

There are certainly technical merits to the RA-based approach.

Tim

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email