IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] PD to hosts

sthaug@nethelp.no Mon, 16 November 2015 18:37 UTC

Return-Path: <sthaug@nethelp.no>
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 34BDB1A8712 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Nov 2015 10:37:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.086
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.086 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.585, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 JVxbxsqorF5Z for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Nov 2015 10:37:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bizet.nethelp.no (bizet.nethelp.no [195.1.209.33]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B4AF51A8711 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Nov 2015 10:37:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 23368 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2015 18:37:16 -0000
Received: from bizet.nethelp.no (HELO localhost) (195.1.209.33) by bizet.nethelp.no with SMTP; 16 Nov 2015 18:37:16 -0000
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 19:37:16 +0100
Message-Id: <20151116.193716.74754318.sthaug@nethelp.no>
To: pch-v6ops-3@u-1.phicoh.com
From: sthaug@nethelp.no
In-Reply-To: <m1ZyNyc-0000EoC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
References: <m1ZyNBq-0000HnC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D9831832F4CF07@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> <m1ZyNyc-0000EoC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
X-Mailer: Mew version 3.3 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/pBjlDfmm6qQoDbDVLz7suI5LD3k>
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v6ops] PD to hosts
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: <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: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 18:37:21 -0000

> >> 1) How do packets reach the host. Is that documented somewhere?
> >
> >RFC3633 is largely silent on this, but when P is delegated to N, it is
> >implied that the delegating router must somehow inject information
> >into the routing system that will guide packets with destination
> >address A to N.
> 
> I wonder where this should be documented. There seem to be some other
> interesting interactions: a DHCPv6 server running on a host should not
> hand out a PD to a host (because it doesn't work), but can hand it out to
> a router. And can hand it out when there request comes through a relay agent.

The difference between host and router seems to be getting more and
more artificial, what with servers running lots of VMs etc.

I find it much more logical to simply assume that if *some* client
asks for a PD, it knows how to use it. Whether the client is a host or
a router is rather irrelevant.

Steinar Haug, AS 2116

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email