IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] IPv6-Only Preferred DHCPv4 option

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Mon, 09 December 2019 13:55 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.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 CF3761200C4 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Dec 2019 05:55:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 xQr3vGKFzb5f for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Dec 2019 05:55:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg1-x535.google.com (mail-pg1-x535.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::535]) (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 042EC120024 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Dec 2019 05:55:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg1-x535.google.com with SMTP id x7so7150733pgl.11 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 09 Dec 2019 05:55:55 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:date:subject:message-id :cc:to; bh=3J1tEs5oHem0+TuHud2w7oGvhWALdfQmHXn3CdNBP0I=; b=AUljysnX+nadNdYpTCxVlEcrUrcC9MEMJQwL9Fr7lzDmGBbgqDKIZ1OIEI78HMEGuP a0u/TrYYmlQ/wuz1C2Nkq7ypHw4TS1t6RT0XrlfKun1AF2XT284F+G28tA0dhD+NYPPU bgNGrwTe8m8b/tWZeEUzGqCHjcel8+yg5gpetE5Tbfft1hRH2vsOGFtIOYou5F1o4nAi Il7vqR9UTUcgvkji3WNROMhgrf9Ef8I9YlOCVcp2RxMqeq28z7qsOxbeBHmVV9LrJRkj TxRnV4mA/VAZ+yG837ed84aLNIqr+cXs4umwYBW/zHMbvTbXcMeP6SsyEJCvsPt7lEKv QphQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:date :subject:message-id:cc:to; bh=3J1tEs5oHem0+TuHud2w7oGvhWALdfQmHXn3CdNBP0I=; b=gcly4ynGnguZSX4BoUj6ml0RbtlLrvt0TM2XMjggH94jcc1u1l2yQAssm9Xw0TZe0g qYIN9xZ45PyQQfJ0ygFVUNegd1ccHiyb1Ur/8LHI6J2fcF72ONHr6eLMBT0bQ5WQUqLU zA+H36do1SMMKLfkFNw2yzIG9Fd2Za/AydD4jai5NqJrBLL+uk+n+jNeR2M1grW2M6/g oi5aMOG6sXpf2VlHspNPA1zPjxv+NPY8e5oTqU4EWyTuqoizq9XWms9fcz3qQOteFpP8 9zmJ8iL4QHvRuPDzQc5w7LFtE2Vn/JMe88jtrVjMniz6Z3OKQfcY68SFEksYr3qYBNOw IgEQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX2FcvSQTDGJX8JDNzsmMSuK4o9YyDphImNDJynHX3hvBmOuMX0 6ZC+/XPF61RyAfePX5wN22WGXw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw16CjY+dT4vvPGXbvuIaJV4hZSkk9abO+C9/7PTpU9GElbtwQ1XrFJasArr84zA0yHkyvhwg==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:289:: with SMTP id 131mr18937504pgc.149.1575899755372; Mon, 09 Dec 2019 05:55:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2600:380:856c:cbd0:5159:5669:afa0:d14d? ([2600:380:856c:cbd0:5159:5669:afa0:d14d]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s18sm27853043pfs.20.2019.12.09.05.55.53 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 09 Dec 2019 05:55:53 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2019 05:55:52 -0800
Message-Id: <910D2CD7-B3CF-4FEF-A34F-EE376196DF39@fugue.com>
Cc: Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com>, V6 Ops List <v6ops@ietf.org>
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (17E180a)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/xbn3xxyKf_5BK5BVnBeTzyweMN4>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] IPv6-Only Preferred DHCPv4 option
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 09 Dec 2019 13:55:58 -0000

You said it yourself. If there’s a thundering herd, we don’t have to wait for them all to time out, because there’s no limit to how many answers we  can send prior to acknowledgment. We don’t need to write anything to disk to give an answer.

Plus, if something is snooping the DHCP exchange it won’t be able to take any inappropriate action because the signaling on which it would base that action is not present. 

> On Dec 8, 2019, at 22:40, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> It sounds like you're arguing that the network should put 0.0.0.0 in the yiaddr field when sending an offer, even if doing so requires more server changes. What I don't understand though, is: why? What is the advantage of putting 0.0.0.0 in the offer? What do those server changes buy us?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email