Re: [v6ops] Comment on 'draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host-07'

David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu> Fri, 25 August 2017 14:53 UTC

Return-Path: <farmer@umn.edu>
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 50281132C04 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 07:53:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.799
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.799 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_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, 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=umn.edu
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 0VtvTniRpXqO for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 07:53:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mta-p5.oit.umn.edu (mta-p5.oit.umn.edu [134.84.196.205]) (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 D97E91321CB for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 07:53:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mta-p5.oit.umn.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DE6DC4E for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 14:53:15 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at umn.edu
Received: from mta-p5.oit.umn.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mta-p5.oit.umn.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kz2IwY_RKoFA for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 09:53:14 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from mail-vk0-f70.google.com (mail-vk0-f70.google.com [209.85.213.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mta-p5.oit.umn.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB3D354D for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 09:53:14 -0500 (CDT)
Received: by mail-vk0-f70.google.com with SMTP id h16so15665vkd.4 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 07:53:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=umn.edu; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=lhhMo2Ho1+2mIO5wlcw0n39cle6Zdc1iQc8PRX5252I=; b=KLiF7DXHHJ36qRdQxtlu9L0VxJu0pfBJQ6+zFgvxHmtwMZZWzCW4f/OaYhBj8deS8s wvafFwGEMHmq2RxJL1x2tKmAho95yyfjgmc25FnCgbg7pbhr+BJj6pnQsN2YXJNm9s/H 5hB/C5kQ5hLJHK//2UyRRO2OWqyBhA8Oz18uAnTIFrAFX6lEpC9ibPY5epC6U0U65KR3 rTqPxsLljkyYV2j/zSLLtl0x06eSVfTsY2m//oKIf0V+qHhReg0d7BtaMwefgXquTSHv o78DcH3Xk657tVo8flXy9IRuoN55pvorbQ8uqhuo1j3ily7zOONJ3a/1pGXN+F51ohqv yosw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=lhhMo2Ho1+2mIO5wlcw0n39cle6Zdc1iQc8PRX5252I=; b=iU0d9+/YYoKE3HlXofOqCn/hiiph7Z/6XNwL18sblOcTjUrScSWWQDCVgwWuidkNhl 6hUZoy+eZ/3eDS8mcCYOTDYwkJaIc4v5bELZtCr6bQehGAPxDj1whar9zf+3+ELoEP9B bnlvO1vLBJqJI1HjH10uJNBxdS80fxiGCMpPnwVlJNralF+s6+bGFVbct1IIhLPKc21y cxcSH8PtyAU9swHWmk5ylRzLoEPofsRibFFFYMyRLdy+A+1jLrQJGSuxf1POndxNDy9K IJmxUamZs75nI42GcPz3qxF7JkvvDl1anfmDRuKaWA5m2AQPADz3HcijgwMxeFGH4BA/ Y+GA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHYfb5hPr0w5mo55vMYTBTzxY8zuABxleI6JriIWw88qjPJEohohSkgi iaHP8sZZoivhAuaLJUmbHHjq1t940s8eECSph1Rk8CGcSHrm6Gj+VLfDS4+jrj+zf4var2OtjSi TRRzghv38UAvNapzl
X-Received: by 10.159.32.164 with SMTP id 33mr7547296uaa.123.1503672793960; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 07:53:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.159.32.164 with SMTP id 33mr7547284uaa.123.1503672793601; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 07:53:13 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.103.172.15 with HTTP; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 07:53:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <bc1257f1db0c48de824e40135fbcb854@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com>
References: <bc1257f1db0c48de824e40135fbcb854@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com>
From: David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2017 09:53:13 -0500
Message-ID: <CAN-Dau0xAzJQpCJOJ3di5Qjjqqgz_yTj45vSQTBoFfMmDLdq6Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114d7546b9429f0557951a4f"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/u54dv1F7AfDSwqsjuSLGQx7P1zs>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Comment on 'draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host-07'
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: Fri, 25 Aug 2017 14:53:20 -0000

I don't think you can just plop that in there without at least some
revisions to section 4 as well.

Thinking about this a bit, I think you are referring to redirects in
general and your draft 'draft-templin-6man-rio-redirect' more specifically.
In a current unmodified host only individual addresses and not whole
prefixes can be redirected, and therefore the router would have to track
individual addresses to redirect them, which again break the premise of
reducing ND.  Once redirects for whole prefixes are commonly available then
at the discretion of the router you could do as you suggest.

While I like the ideas in 'draft-templin-6man-rio-redirect' they are not
generally implement in the vast majority of hosts today, and therefore
networks implementing 'draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host' can't
reasonably expect the capability to be available, and can only reasonably
expect redirects for individual addresses, and implementing peer-to-peer
communication on that basis is not compatible with the fundamental
expectation in 'draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host'.

Once the capabilities described in 'draft-templin-6man-rio-redirect' are
generally available, I think it would be reasonable to add an option for
peer-to-peer communication to a future revision of
'draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host', but based on the
capabilities available today you can't implement peer-to-peer
communications without violating other fundamental expectations in
draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host'.

Thanks.

On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Templin, Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com
> wrote:

> In section 2, the document says:
>
>    " o  Two devices (subscriber/hosts), both attached to the same provider
>       managed shared network should only be able to communicate through
>       the provider managed First Hop Router"
>
> Please change to say:
>
>    "o  Two devices (subscriber/hosts), both attached to the same provider
>       managed shared network should only be able to communicate through
>       the provider managed First Hop Router unless the shared network
>       explicitly permits peer-to-peer operations"
>
> Thanks - Fred
> fred.l.templin@boeing.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>



-- 
===============================================
David Farmer               Email:farmer@umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE        Phone: 612-626-0815 <(612)%20626-0815>
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952 <(612)%20812-9952>
===============================================