IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] [homenet] Tsinghua work on source/destination routing

Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> Thu, 07 November 2013 23:47 UTC

Return-Path: <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
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 DF1CD21F9985; Thu, 7 Nov 2013 15:47:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.557
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.557 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.042, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7h6j0aIBkAd5; Thu, 7 Nov 2013 15:47:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2759821F8F61; Thu, 7 Nov 2013 15:47:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id rA7NleBL014483; Thu, 7 Nov 2013 23:47:40 GMT
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk rA7NleBL014483
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=201304; t=1383868060; bh=aQC6ux+DdJRqGiKUSnmuyE59k7g=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=BbsJgYUKzu9ypKwZ/p1SHAXB2ApZ26UeZWX319Wz8zZIQmqMXXJ7UubrSZ5Haqt/j 1t9aj8oIj7vzuuBsBCdxHPdPKcncGjYrHr6qZQoYXAYuA6ximPccleaFJwmdv8wfD5 uGuhyQS93uwYObgm6Pxc4FWzFOdcoTLF9vmWt3cc=
Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk ([2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:401]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:68da]) envelope-from <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> with ESMTP (valid=N/A) id pA6Nle0959602001IS ret-id none; Thu, 07 Nov 2013 23:47:40 +0000
Received: from wireless-v6.meeting.ietf.org (wireless-v6.meeting.ietf.org [IPv6:2001:67c:370:160:4cc9:61d9:dc83:b91] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id rA7NlUKi024624 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 7 Nov 2013 23:47:33 GMT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1816\))
From: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <CAFU7BATOG_Y4UtpRM9hu1qH7rV8_cxo0XHghrNt0xr5WUZuhiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2013 23:47:30 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <EMEW3|eb37ece4e1e2766b695a6c19361975e1pA6Nle03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|AB436AF3-E784-494F-BB51-4683024D001D@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
References: <F7C18630-1964-4AFD-8549-559D7582B114@cisco.com> <CAFU7BAQT=+B==8pvOYSsWnCvcMEVzy2nh8dAZZXHzYjwmedRpg@mail.gmail.com> <CAJE_bqfU8C+Tc2rQCZ=vpmfTDdOiGz-sd-G4QNBpHdwXDz9bqQ@mail.gmail.com> <27F73F5B-6095-43E1-ADBE-2E05E8071E3F@cisco.com> <527BE84E.2000205@gmail.com> <CAFU7BATOG_Y4UtpRM9hu1qH7rV8_cxo0XHghrNt0xr5WUZuhiQ@mail.gmail.com> <AB436AF3-E784-494F-BB51-4683024D001D@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1816)
X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
X-smtpf-Report: sid=pA6Nle095960200100; tid=pA6Nle0959602001IS; client=relay,forged,no_ptr,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=5:0; fails=0
X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: rA7NleBL014483
X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" <v6ops@ietf.org>, 神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp>, Routing WG <rtgwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] [homenet] Tsinghua work on source/destination routing
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 07 Nov 2013 23:47:48 -0000

On 7 Nov 2013, at 23:33, Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 8:21 PM, Brian E Carpenter
> <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>> I suspect it's some of each. The host should, I should think, set the hop limit to one on any packet that is to a link-local address, to ensure that the packet is not repeated by a broken router (apart from protocols that ask to have it set to 255 and have the receiving host check for that value). Also, upstream network's BCP 38 implementation sounds suspect, and I'm with Jen in wondering why a router forwarded the packet in the first place.
>> 
>> Are you sure these packets come from hosts? There is a known case
>> which is a router generating ICMP reply packets that has no GUA
>> configured since all its peers are link-local.
> 
> I saw packets with link-local source/GUA destination coming from hosts
> and from routers (I analyzed EUI-64-based IIDs) back in 2011. Now
> majority of such traffic is TCP to our services and, again, IID checks
> shows that these packets are from hosts.

Any specifc clues by vendor?

Tim

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email