IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] GRASP

Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> Mon, 15 January 2018 10:24 UTC

Return-Path: <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
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 9838A12DA29 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Jan 2018 02:24:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.632
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.632 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, 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 exlV7rBVibr3 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Jan 2018 02:24:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cirse-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (cirse-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.148]) (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 E241212DA0A for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Jan 2018 02:24:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by cirse-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id w0FAOgqe037973 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Jan 2018 11:24:42 +0100
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 9EA7B208200 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Jan 2018 11:24:42 +0100 (CET)
Received: from muguet2.intra.cea.fr (muguet2.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.7]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 956EF200801 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Jan 2018 11:24:42 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [10.8.34.184] (is227335.intra.cea.fr [10.8.34.184]) by muguet2.intra.cea.fr (8.15.2/8.15.2/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.4) with ESMTP id w0FAOgBf009729 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Jan 2018 11:24:42 +0100
To: v6ops@ietf.org
References: <fc31bd170b134c8292d33f52400b175b@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com> <268669d2-e36d-9fb1-cf1c-d3be4cb85e51@gmail.com> <8316cc707dd847a8b2d45e4b6b468f36@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DCDD69B@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <0EFD6879-B33B-4639-AE77-A90607DD9455@google.com> <90825185-6fd2-296d-229f-43a79e16bb63@gmail.com> <B07B4644-B5DC-408E-8130-0832AFAE47E2@google.com> <CAO42Z2y6rO8S-F93J6BDcMzgkHb4-czuQd-1QArzM3MfO77EKw@mail.gmail.com> <EC75835C-7ACA-4FF9-8A98-467EA7222021@steffann.nl> <616fc7f3-fea5-bd35-22b2-27272ee73342@gmail.com> <AD06035C-63CF-47F4-BA6B-C5173F261BC7@employees.org>
From: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8945bf1f-4127-50ac-00e4-3df1b57228d4@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 11:24:42 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <AD06035C-63CF-47F4-BA6B-C5173F261BC7@employees.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: fr
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/vL8_LAmEo7txSRhj0YaRjoSLyxU>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] GRASP
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: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 10:24:47 -0000


Le 15/01/2018 à 09:38, Ole Troan a écrit :
>> c) If James is correct about the attitude of ISPs we (for some sense of
>> "we") need to do something about it. ISPs are motivated by revenue and
>> OPEX. How can we make support of prefix delegation more attractive to
>> ISPs?
> 
> Let's clarify this a bit to avoid misunderstandings.
> 
> ISPs _do_ prefix delegation today.
> 
> What is missing is any further use of that address block inside of the home network.
> 
> 1) Subnet the delegated prefix and assign /64s  to local interfaces.
> 2) Static routes
> 3) Sub-delegation with DHCP PD
> 4) HNCP
> 
> As far as I know only 1 is commonly supported.

2 is also supported in ISP for home network.  The ISP I use has a web 
GUI on the CPE on which the end user at home ('grandma') can fill in 
IPv6 static routes.

Alex

> 
> You can argue to what extent this is an ISP problem or something else, depending on where the demarcation point is.
> Likely a chicken and egg problem too, since internal routers a) haven't been that common b) don't support HNCP, c) there hasn't been that much of a use case.
> 
> Perhaps if we James can describe his use case, that might give us a bit more leverage.
> 
> Cheers,
> Ole
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email