IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Are we competitive?

Gert Doering <gert@space.net> Mon, 15 August 2022 20:31 UTC

Return-Path: <gert@space.net>
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 3EA5FC1524D6 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Aug 2022 13:31:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.106 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=space.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KbF9Kkla3wxv for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Aug 2022 13:31:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gatekeeper1-relay.space.net (gatekeeper1-relay.space.net [IPv6:2001:608:3:85::38]) (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 33941C14CF09 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Aug 2022 13:31:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=space.net; i=@space.net; q=dns/txt; s=esa; t=1660595462; x=1692131462; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=ca0Gn5W/KdVMsp5viIdOKkMEvPXd4t3RFTE6i69Z9lc=; b=hHUxzrvxg27uJGXvRXVVEZJeprXhC8GQC1O4h7BhsYmI1j7b9gek2uZ0 SX01AgZLfJSVaLrE9UhylCh5AyLHRcQyjdinOBeAaqe7WDaS2ez8rhK2R dNQFcN+CQZWmIPVM+UXAtejQr8XIrdV6eCeBRo+C9+XNZcRO/gFKFb9A6 wswUwdudtJAwDW+WMuEitYrQ4m/4sNr3AEO/bzYBUrYv7QFMJqmyllNa3 W7EfguRVY+qxFAcarR4CylbzYQzXPgQMJBsgfzqZWyfiQFQM8epr/sNPZ 4ngeNJ2ZTFC4iUkFOOeZvUlK7vOSmcbsisQpqRhRW0sZOthVMkv6150i1 Q==;
X-SpaceNet-SBRS: None
Received: from mobil.space.net ([195.30.115.67]) by gatekeeper1-relay.space.net with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 15 Aug 2022 22:30:58 +0200
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietf.org
Received: from mobil.space.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2F8042CE7 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Aug 2022 22:30:57 +0200 (CEST)
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
Received: from moebius4.space.net (moebius4.space.net [IPv6:2001:608:2:2::251]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EAD240FA5; Mon, 15 Aug 2022 22:30:57 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by moebius4.space.net (Postfix, from userid 1007) id 97A3EB9597; Mon, 15 Aug 2022 22:30:57 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2022 22:30:57 +0200
From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
To: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>
Cc: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>, Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.eduard=40huawei.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>, David Farmer <farmer=40umn.edu@dmarc.ietf.org>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <YvqtAQoywadiEMSi@Space.Net>
References: <CAM5+tA8UF-3ZHkE0npZ0r5sDQ+FudTSPhpWns1BsPCk=NecX+Q@mail.gmail.com> <7e4606c4534c49a593863bda870b6e63@huawei.com> <3f138b03-940a-e83a-6c6e-6039506b6e4b@gont.com.ar> <10f89b7cbe784881bd22b4af81577aa6@huawei.com> <CAN-Dau0nz0TouDnz5pei0MCmTzSbP8q+gHLx1m0sxX0hsuPX3w@mail.gmail.com> <b9f33aa499b043bb90ff926731db9739@huawei.com> <b885bdd4-d837-1eda-9614-36c76190d920@gont.com.ar> <a6975472445f49018abab153fa61b399@huawei.com> <YvoaJ+IJdl/VXYLj@Space.Net> <CAO42Z2xnE_NeTnTJ8MTTiKX2oZ5Wo6Rxss-42hqHzwJ7O_iXwg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="JoQDZiUD2tI97ebw"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAO42Z2xnE_NeTnTJ8MTTiKX2oZ5Wo6Rxss-42hqHzwJ7O_iXwg@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/yclRunKjTrVhJdGr2CNOxuVWPl8>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Are we competitive?
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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 Aug 2022 20:31:07 -0000

Hi,

On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 09:13:04PM +1000, Mark Smith wrote:
> > Hiding of internal information.
> 
> There are ways you can do that on IPv6.
> 
> A single /64 has more address space than the entire 32 bit IPv4 address
> space, 4 billion times more.
> 
> So if you want to hide your IPv6 topology, put every host in a single /64,
> via something like ISATAP + RFC7217 and RFC8981, tunneled over IPv4, or
> something else that allows you to put all hosts in a single IPv6/64, like
> EVPN.

Why would I want to run IPv6 if it needs IPv4 infrastructure to do so?

Seriously?

This is a discussion that started (among others) with "why are enterprises
not deploying IPv6" and then people make suggestions like this.

> An IPsec VPN concentrator is another example of something that can put
> everybody in the same /64.

Sounds like a spectacular idea to get removed very fast from said
enterprise's workforce.

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                      Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14        Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444         USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email