IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-host-addr-availability discussion - address out of the delegated prefix, on the egress - no DAD

Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> Tue, 03 November 2015 03:04 UTC

Return-Path: <lorenzo@google.com>
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 556961ACEBB for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 19:04:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.388
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.388 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=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 Qu1IDjHpBLEt for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 19:04:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yk0-x22f.google.com (mail-yk0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6014E1ACEB2 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 19:04:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: by ykek133 with SMTP id k133so3739772yke.2 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 02 Nov 2015 19:04:01 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=H9iuavxm6GvBN8G+uFyl6MVP9awB+iemE66SSghYtrw=; b=gNBi6mRZDp0uZh+LJ5X4npPAsU5zRhqnWuTvHwySqs05oYuCDqdtFBbMvbh5gLkauU WzddTncr0JnQrrdKGNrD3Z1HzmFteTEvcFYDMnGyDhzRWs9AmYKEhT40bVYZCp8tzuD2 yWV2E3vnv6VfxIsinwXqp69R9c7GRpkgOICRbjeND45WOb8LgW6/iN9TAIZ7blYkTlI6 7O7krpxb1QtCeGwUbs3TSDwPqwSTEFfO74PL5A7zIhEEnENmIm3teHjJ4eyyQq5peQnQ 5m2JWBMfM6rHWcEZRCSwqZwJ8GDitg7cnYW01O995tpHq/UYLRHSgJjam7v7Xrq3tNtv i4fA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=H9iuavxm6GvBN8G+uFyl6MVP9awB+iemE66SSghYtrw=; b=a40FAh1GQSGHKHCC3/PCmemyS2VV7lPYN2QG6dsaAwMpjMuvCRAuGxUuKfmjXv3J+N US2SXlCa48oZH8JmqbF4qMKv8my3cZBZddN+lN2FtzJb4Ydq/DAhMRJpHYNF3gU/XXy4 6zXk1EbM0EyAQoqcwgyeOZVyMC5IGCHTZst0hcf7m+jIz1/himY80jts3cG0BhwaB3Af NRlXm3JVkNaJd8Dt4A2ZexTvlkPraLuU/IO/tYO3AZxMfQl0PguAGljlLVbpYCy6J/VY XhAQdsHPMiHoQtHfquHzd3aU0aMAazEfG8RXqUYRdzcBV+TNgY1F6+Uw5zS/+DipKeFX cn/A==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlMIjwtolDCq+4T2aR6ZRGjIaw2qlPZIiMetS4n3i1w2mvVPvHuT7pv8xPWur2s42nW6yVS
X-Received: by 10.129.136.5 with SMTP id y5mr4621029ywf.35.1446519841398; Mon, 02 Nov 2015 19:04:01 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.37.87.197 with HTTP; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 19:03:41 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <5638223E.5090404@gmail.com>
References: <8D175A1F-B1AE-44B4-838E-1C853B6C937D@cisco.com> <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D9831832F391A7@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> <CAKD1Yr15C-uoxUw0kgWO-d=LmUK8qWGLS7vt+22W+k8xXtDY+g@mail.gmail.com> <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D9831832F393F1@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D9831832F3941D@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> <5638223E.5090404@gmail.com>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2015 12:03:41 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKD1Yr219s7o7-koDg+DarUFB_KVkcfYM4YZVsHD67gdPeY-8Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114effba4f085505239a257f"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/w6TTw82RTp2LjimnmR_kmEaCzf0>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-host-addr-availability discussion - address out of the delegated prefix, on the egress - no DAD
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: Tue, 03 Nov 2015 03:04:03 -0000

On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 11:55 AM, Alexandre Petrescu <
alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Le 03/11/2015 10:31, Templin, Fred L a écrit :
>
>> Bumping up one level – is it clear to everyone that it is OK to
>> assign addresses taken from a DHCPv6 delegated prefix to the interface
>> over which the
>> prefix was received? And, that DAD is not required for those addresses?
>>
>
Is this a statement we need to make in this draft, though?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email