From nobody Fri Jun 13 16:39:34 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F44A1B27E1 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 2014 16:39:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.4 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_61=0.6, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 fUtDFbHvYYNk for ; Fri, 13 Jun 2014 16:39:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qc0-x231.google.com (mail-qc0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::231]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 50BF31A02B8 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 2014 16:39:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qc0-f177.google.com with SMTP id r5so1391279qcx.8 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 2014 16:39:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=RP+NbILqtxaLe5HJg+OoXSvrSkC3KRbJYW1/A9dAN4U=; b=FMAE6U4Id6skSPZsQI5NqG4Be9jXoy1VwSGKFOkvmzm4X0pWUp2hkOwhJgnHmBLxxo 496mhMNv+a7U4WnsUJhkyyg2yxeZSaULT+XT8imfAT9W+jkJHeXk6+Z3dsmIvqjpkTtc X52VoVKG2okTGalcgOI6mV5MpV8Q56qDhrSoHB7gacHOaw66JTP61PyI/pMWGop/u8OJ AjGWWF7A+Np8ZwMWehj43ELftGLv7z0+7XBHez6hSWx7TgCAoPczDDVTE5C5JGUpYfP+ v9PuBLHvepiybSRTLbNvqNFj76wn+56Xotyy/im4wYcNdrHvfH2DJMkpfRHjIQRhF4yU S2mA== X-Received: by 10.140.26.179 with SMTP id 48mr7806293qgv.51.1402702771487; Fri, 13 Jun 2014 16:39:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2601:6:6780:19e:8998:b641:dde5:a6f6? ([2601:6:6780:19e:8998:b641:dde5:a6f6]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id s13sm8789014qay.39.2014.06.13.16.39.28 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 13 Jun 2014 16:39:28 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.2\)) From: Ralph Droms In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 19:39:26 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <9BE854AA-DEE3-4984-A6DB-530D86D2D62A@gmail.com> References: To: "sunset4@ietf.org" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.2) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sunset4/OLw7NB39M39SO6ngo-QI8rMgJNI Subject: Re: [sunset4] discussion on sunset4-noipv4 draft in other WGs X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 23:39:33 -0000 On Apr 16, 2014, at 1:38 PM 4/16/14, George, Wes = wrote: > Simon Perreault (and to some lesser extent,I ) has been involved in a = fairly animated discussion across Homenet and V6Ops about = draft-ietf-sunset4-noipv4 after requesting those WG=92s feedback on the = draft. > [...] >=20 > I=92d encourage folks to take a look and provide input on this list, = so that the authors have good guidance from the WG on how this WG draft = should evolve to address the feedback provided.=20 >=20 > Thanks, > =20 > Wes I re-read the animated discussion and I have a few thoughts... I found I had to read the document carefully to pick up some subtle points. The details are all there in the doc but I missed some of them during a first reading. And I think the animated discussion may have missed some of these details, as well. One of the problems I had with the document was in sorting out the specific goals and use cases for the proposed mechanisms. I concluded there are actually two goals: (1) explicitly command all (or some nodes) on a link to turn off IPv4 (while potentially others continue to use IPv4) (2) in the case of a router, prohibit advertising IPv4 services on other interfaces=20 So, do I have those goals right? If so, it's important to realize that (1) involves more than just turning off DHCPv4, and is a more ambitious goal than the goal of RFC7038, which only tried to reduce DHCPv6 traffic by increasing SOL_MAX_RT without trying to turn off IPv6 altogether. In my opinion, it is debatable whether (2) is an appropriate goal for a router advertisement or host configuration protocol; my preference would be for an RFC aimed specifically at customer edge routers (like RFC 7084) that describes in detail how a customer edge router is configured not to provide IPv4 service. Regarding (1), my first reaction was that the right mechanism for that control would be DHCPv4. Seems to me it's about the same amount of code to detect a DHCPv4 option and turn off IPv4 (including the DHCPv4 client) as to detect a DHCPv6 or RA option and turn off IPv4. Personally, I think either design can be made to work, both designs have drawbacks and neither design has strong advantages over the other. But, if the consensus of the sunset4 WG is to use DHCPv6 and = RAs, then that's the specification that should go forward unless there's some specific reason why that design won't work. I don't know of a reason why the DHCPv6/RA design won't work. Finally, I tried to convince myself that one or the other of DHCPv6 or RAs would be sufficient. But not every host has a DHCPv6 client, and RAs won't support differential control of hosts on a link, so it seems both DHCPv6 and RAs are needed. - Ralph From nobody Fri Jun 20 01:34:33 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6FB41B2798 for ; Fri, 20 Jun 2014 01:34:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.75 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 iEo14iUQvUi8 for ; Fri, 20 Jun 2014 01:34:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-we0-x22e.google.com (mail-we0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::22e]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D5A61AD6B1 for ; Fri, 20 Jun 2014 01:34:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-we0-f174.google.com with SMTP id u57so3481602wes.33 for ; Fri, 20 Jun 2014 01:34:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=gxYwZjx0UnvBQPE7F9l1qy7WgTnSG7KffD6McImy4hY=; b=te23ayyoW4SKXxnjt6sSw5UQOljHNiBLQLWucY2rtiVWj7kc2jgG8fhm2eU0Je4Ddv /H3rqAi4haW8c/uK5Pl7rhqdR/pHb1HTZ6jMP1qrQk+rfwYNcHNVu7lQJu2lS8ZJGJuq 4XuM31oVq0DQbgtfVMLac0qCiQD4XNZP3QIPo5WArBRQLfCokPgqVETDq35VS6viV1WW X/TT4YrO3HgZft0UOoOQ8Hm3TiWAkOVwxkSAewKjZiVF4rAVaRp0UpkmadNCn1Mo/usK fUN07Ws2UIQOjyjvdna74/H8xlarqp/RAWFid9WtIQPNUhyZFD4NHlKVR3r1i0KkQAIl ucJg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.133.41 with SMTP id oz9mr1318155wjb.131.1403253268016; Fri, 20 Jun 2014 01:34:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.233.198 with HTTP; Fri, 20 Jun 2014 01:34:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140620075046.6774.27066.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <20140620075046.6774.27066.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 16:34:27 +0800 Message-ID: From: "Fan, Peng" To: sunset4@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sunset4/fKo8dxPrMSzbI5IngBv-iVEMcfw Subject: [sunset4] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-fan-sunset4-router-id-00.txt X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 08:34:30 -0000 Hi all, The following draft is about problems of managing router IDs in an IPv6 only network as well as some solution ideas. It is an effort based on the feedback during the last IETF meeting. Your review and comments are appreciated. Best regards, Peng ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: internet-drafts@ietf.org Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 00:50:46 -0700 Subject: New Version Notification for draft-fan-sunset4-router-id-00.txt To: Peng Fan A new version of I-D, draft-fan-sunset4-router-id-00.txt has been successfully submitted by Peng Fan and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-fan-sunset4-router-id Revision: 00 Title: Managing Router Identifiers during IPv4 Sunset Document date: 2014-06-20 Group: Individual Submission Pages: 3 URL: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-fan-sunset4-router-id-00.txt Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fan-sunset4-router-id/ Htmlized: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fan-sunset4-router-id-00 Abstract: This document describes problems of managing protocol identifiers when turning off IPv4 and migrating to IPv6 only network, with some potential solutions discussed. Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. The IETF Secretariat From nobody Tue Jun 24 08:18:36 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9AEF1B2AAD for ; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 08:18:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.416 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.416 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 fQaqG5EMugpT for ; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 08:18:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cdpipgw02.twcable.com (cdpipgw02.twcable.com [165.237.59.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E22661B2B16 for ; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 08:16:51 -0700 (PDT) X-SENDER-IP: 10.136.163.13 X-SENDER-REPUTATION: None X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,538,1400040000"; d="scan'208";a="371045285" Received: from unknown (HELO PRVPEXHUB04.corp.twcable.com) ([10.136.163.13]) by cdpipgw02.twcable.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-MD5; 24 Jun 2014 11:13:38 -0400 Received: from PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.78]) by PRVPEXHUB04.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.13]) with mapi; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 11:13:57 -0400 From: "George, Wes" To: "sunset4@ietf.org" Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 11:13:56 -0400 Thread-Topic: sunset4 - Requested session has been scheduled for IETF 90 Thread-Index: Ac+Pvusv+QZ9reFNREiArK4Qo2mckQ== Message-ID: References: <20140623183125.30660.24470.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20140623183125.30660.24470.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.2.140509 acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sunset4/fsPpLmEYgzMX9_F6H79zIcCUCeg Subject: [sunset4] FW: sunset4 - Requested session has been scheduled for IETF 90 X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 15:18:34 -0000 T3VyIFdHIHNlc3Npb24gaGFzIGJlZW4gc2NoZWR1bGVkLiBQbGVhc2UgYmVnaW4gZGlzY3Vzc2lu ZyBpdGVtcyBmb3IgdGhlDQphZ2VuZGEuDQoNCkhlcmUgaXMgYSBsaW5rIHRvIHRoZSBwcmVsaW1p bmFyeSBhZ2VuZGEsIGZpbmFsIGFnZW5kYSBwdWJsaXNoZWQgRnJpZGF5LA0Kc28gaWYgdGhlcmUn cyBhIG1ham9yIGNvbmZsaWN0LCB3ZSBuZWVkIHRvIGtub3cgQVNBUC4NCmh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRy YWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWVldGluZy85MC9hZ2VuZGEuaHRtbA0KaHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tl ci5pZXRmLm9yZy9tZWV0aW5nLzkwL2FnZW5kYS50eHQNCg0KDQpUaGFua3MsDQoNCldlcw0KDQoN Cg0KT24gNi8yMy8xNCwgMjozMSBQTSwgIiJJRVRGIFNlY3JldGFyaWF0IiIgPGFnZW5kYUBpZXRm Lm9yZz4gd3JvdGU6DQoNCj5EZWFyIFdlc2xleSBHZW9yZ2UsDQo+DQo+VGhlIHNlc3Npb24ocykg dGhhdCB5b3UgaGF2ZSByZXF1ZXN0ZWQgaGF2ZSBiZWVuIHNjaGVkdWxlZC4NCj5CZWxvdyBpcyB0 aGUgc2NoZWR1bGVkIHNlc3Npb24gaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gZm9sbG93ZWQgYnkNCj50aGUgb3JpZ2lu YWwgcmVxdWVzdC4NCj4NCj5zdW5zZXQ0IFNlc3Npb24gMSAoMTowMDowMCkNCj4gICAgVGh1cnNk YXksIEFmdGVybm9vbiBTZXNzaW9uIElJSSAxNzMwLTE4MzANCj4gICAgUm9vbSBOYW1lOiBDYW5h ZGlhbiBzaXplOiAxMDAwDQo+ICAgIC0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KPg0KPg0KPg0KPlJlcXVlc3QgSW5mb3JtYXRpb246DQo+DQo+DQo+LS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tDQo+V29y a2luZyBHcm91cCBOYW1lOiBTdW5zZXR0aW5nIElQdjQNCj5BcmVhIE5hbWU6IEludGVybmV0IEFy ZWENCj5TZXNzaW9uIFJlcXVlc3RlcjogV2VzbGV5IEdlb3JnZQ0KPg0KPk51bWJlciBvZiBTZXNz aW9uczogMQ0KPkxlbmd0aCBvZiBTZXNzaW9uKHMpOiAgMSBIb3VyDQo+TnVtYmVyIG9mIEF0dGVu ZGVlczogMTUwDQo+Q29uZmxpY3RzIHRvIEF2b2lkOg0KPiBGaXJzdCBQcmlvcml0eTogc29mdHdp cmUgdjZvcHMgcHJlY2lzDQo+IFNlY29uZCBQcmlvcml0eTogZGhjIGludGFyZWEgNm1hbiBob21l bmV0DQo+IFRoaXJkIFByaW9yaXR5OiBvcHNhcmVhIG9wc2F3Zw0KPg0KPg0KPlNwZWNpYWwgUmVx dWVzdHM6DQo+DQo+LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tDQo+DQoNCg0KVGhpcyBFLW1haWwgYW5kIGFueSBvZiBpdHMgYXR0YWNobWVu dHMgbWF5IGNvbnRhaW4gVGltZSBXYXJuZXIgQ2FibGUgcHJvcHJpZXRhcnkgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24s IHdoaWNoIGlzIHByaXZpbGVnZWQsIGNvbmZpZGVudGlhbCwgb3Igc3ViamVjdCB0byBjb3B5cmln aHQgYmVsb25naW5nIHRvIFRpbWUgV2FybmVyIENhYmxlLiBUaGlzIEUtbWFpbCBpcyBpbnRlbmRl ZCBzb2xlbHkgZm9yIHRoZSB1c2Ugb2YgdGhlIGluZGl2aWR1YWwgb3IgZW50aXR5IHRvIHdoaWNo IGl0IGlzIGFkZHJlc3NlZC4gSWYgeW91IGFyZSBub3QgdGhlIGludGVuZGVkIHJlY2lwaWVudCBv ZiB0aGlzIEUtbWFpbCwgeW91IGFyZSBoZXJlYnkgbm90aWZpZWQgdGhhdCBhbnkgZGlzc2VtaW5h dGlvbiwgZGlzdHJpYnV0aW9uLCBjb3B5aW5nLCBvciBhY3Rpb24gdGFrZW4gaW4gcmVsYXRpb24g dG8gdGhlIGNvbnRlbnRzIG9mIGFuZCBhdHRhY2htZW50cyB0byB0aGlzIEUtbWFpbCBpcyBzdHJp Y3RseSBwcm9oaWJpdGVkIGFuZCBtYXkgYmUgdW5sYXdmdWwuIElmIHlvdSBoYXZlIHJlY2VpdmVk IHRoaXMgRS1tYWlsIGluIGVycm9yLCBwbGVhc2Ugbm90aWZ5IHRoZSBzZW5kZXIgaW1tZWRpYXRl bHkgYW5kIHBlcm1hbmVudGx5IGRlbGV0ZSB0aGUgb3JpZ2luYWwgYW5kIGFueSBjb3B5IG9mIHRo aXMgRS1tYWlsIGFuZCBhbnkgcHJpbnRvdXQuDQo= From nobody Thu Jun 26 14:26:31 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B37231B2ED3 for ; Thu, 26 Jun 2014 14:26:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.203 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.203 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 lltVLe2Lk7Qb for ; Thu, 26 Jun 2014 14:26:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from linfre.de (linfre.de [83.151.26.85]) (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 97C421B2EBF for ; Thu, 26 Jun 2014 14:26:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e7240.linfre (109.47.195.148) by linfreserv.linfre (Axigen) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPSA id 3A834E; Thu, 26 Jun 2014 23:26:17 +0200 From: Karsten Thomann To: sunset4@ietf.org Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 23:26:13 +0200 Message-ID: <2743128.Zp2sQ9hkCe@e7240.linfre> User-Agent: KMail/4.13.2 (Linux/3.15.1-35.g3289da4-desktop; KDE/4.13.2; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <20140620075046.6774.27066.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-AXIGEN-DK-Result: No records DomainKey-Status: no signature X-AxigenSpam-Level: 6 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sunset4/f43vXQ5qyPJaUk42_7Bo1jFexTY Cc: "Fan, Peng" Subject: Re: [sunset4] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-fan-sunset4-router-id-00.txt X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 21:26:29 -0000 Hi, I think the solution area should be extended by another possibility to embed IPv4 addresses in v6, as the /96 version has to use the hex version of the ID, the use of a /80 could be used to store them in a format like 2001:db8::1921:6825:5001 or 2001:db8::0102:5525:0001. If you like to use an even better readable approach you can also use a /64 for addresses like 2001:db8::192:168:255:1. Regards Karsten Am Freitag, 20. Juni 2014, 16:34:27 schrieb Fan, Peng: > Hi all, > > The following draft is about problems of managing router IDs in an > IPv6 only network as well as some solution ideas. It is an effort > based on the feedback during the last IETF meeting. Your review and > comments are appreciated. > > Best regards, > Peng > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org > Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 00:50:46 -0700 > Subject: New Version Notification for draft-fan-sunset4-router-id-00.txt > To: Peng Fan > > > A new version of I-D, draft-fan-sunset4-router-id-00.txt > has been successfully submitted by Peng Fan and posted to the > IETF repository. > > Name: draft-fan-sunset4-router-id > Revision: 00 > Title: Managing Router Identifiers during IPv4 Sunset > Document date: 2014-06-20 > Group: Individual Submission > Pages: 3 > URL: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-fan-sunset4-router-id-00.txt > Status: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fan-sunset4-router-id/ Htmlized: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fan-sunset4-router-id-00 > > > Abstract: > This document describes problems of managing protocol identifiers > when turning off IPv4 and migrating to IPv6 only network, with some > potential solutions discussed. > > > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > The IETF Secretariat > > _______________________________________________ > sunset4 mailing list > sunset4@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 From nobody Fri Jun 27 01:43:43 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EFF71B2F33 for ; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 01:43:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.329 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.329 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RELAY_IS_221=2.222, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] 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 EYCp4V0Gdnrf for ; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 01:43:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cmccmta.chinamobile.com (cmccmta.chinamobile.com [221.176.64.232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 1A55B1B2F2A for ; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 01:43:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spf.mail.chinamobile.com (unknown[172.16.20.21]) by rmmx-oa_allagent01-12001 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2ee153ad2e8e234-8e234; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 16:42:55 +0800 (CST) X-RM-TRANSID: 2ee153ad2e8e234-8e234 Received: from adminPC (unknown[10.2.52.208]) by rmsmtp-oa_rmapp03-12003 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2ee353ad2e8b359-365d6; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 16:42:55 +0800 (CST) X-RM-TRANSID: 2ee353ad2e8b359-365d6 From: "Fan, Peng" To: "'Karsten Thomann'" , References: <20140620075046.6774.27066.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2743128.Zp2sQ9hkCe@e7240.linfre> In-Reply-To: <2743128.Zp2sQ9hkCe@e7240.linfre> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 16:43:27 +0800 Message-ID: <004e01cf91e3$dd9580c0$98c08240$@chinamobile.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQFeuMtRPDgZ9J3EcOufl7BB+nvkbwHXVxqfAloSnGWcRMZpUA== Content-Language: zh-cn Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sunset4/XRJnvQ1deUSNocl50fjT66gNWeA Subject: Re: [sunset4] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-fan-sunset4-router-id-00.txt X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 08:43:42 -0000 Hi Karsten, Thanks for the comment, please see reply inline [FP]. > > I think the solution area should be extended by another possibility to embed > IPv4 addresses in v6, as the /96 version has to use the hex version of the ID, [FP] Perhaps we can use the mixed notation, e.g. 2001:db8::192.168.255.1? > the use of a /80 could be used to store them in a format like > 2001:db8::1921:6825:5001 or 2001:db8::0102:5525:0001. > If you like to use an even better readable approach you can also use a /64 for > addresses like 2001:db8::192:168:255:1. [FP] Yes these approaches are quite human-friendly, thanks. [FP] We can also consider if there is another solution besides address mapping and other ideas in the draft. Best regards, Peng > > Regards > Karsten > From nobody Fri Jun 27 02:24:33 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A0831B2F37 for ; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 02:24:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.203 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.203 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 1xFxra0IK4WL for ; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 02:24:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from linfre.de (linfre.de [83.151.26.85]) (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 1449D1B2CC4 for ; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 02:24:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.43.66.140] (194.163.249.24) by linfreserv.linfre (Axigen) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPSA id 02AE59; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 11:24:21 +0200 Message-ID: <53AD3845.7020603@linfre.de> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 11:24:21 +0200 From: Karsten Thomann User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Fan, Peng" References: <20140620075046.6774.27066.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2743128.Zp2sQ9hkCe@e7240.linfre> <004e01cf91e3$dd9580c0$98c08240$@chinamobile.com> In-Reply-To: <004e01cf91e3$dd9580c0$98c08240$@chinamobile.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AXIGEN-DK-Result: No records DomainKey-Status: no signature X-AxigenSpam-Level: 5 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sunset4/NmhcQw5UVUlMS2rfDCvqY6r1ZJQ Cc: sunset4@ietf.org Subject: Re: [sunset4] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-fan-sunset4-router-id-00.txt X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 09:24:33 -0000 Hi, The mixed notation can't be used, as it is converted to the hex version automatically and is stored as the /96 case in hex. ping 2001:db8::192.168.0.1 Pinging 2001:db8::c0a8:1 with 32 bytes of data: At least im not aware of a device which stores the IPv6 address in mixed notation, they accept it and convert it to the hex notation in /96, afaik. Regards Karsten Am 27.06.2014 10:43, schrieb Fan, Peng: > Hi Karsten, > > Thanks for the comment, please see reply inline [FP]. > >> I think the solution area should be extended by another possibility to > embed >> IPv4 addresses in v6, as the /96 version has to use the hex version of the > ID, > [FP] Perhaps we can use the mixed notation, e.g. 2001:db8::192.168.255.1? > >> the use of a /80 could be used to store them in a format like >> 2001:db8::1921:6825:5001 or 2001:db8::0102:5525:0001. >> If you like to use an even better readable approach you can also use a /64 > for >> addresses like 2001:db8::192:168:255:1. > [FP] Yes these approaches are quite human-friendly, thanks. > [FP] We can also consider if there is another solution besides address > mapping and other ideas in the draft. > > Best regards, > Peng > >> Regards >> Karsten >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > sunset4 mailing list > sunset4@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 From nobody Fri Jun 27 08:01:55 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E80B41B2DBB for ; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 08:01:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.329 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.329 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RELAY_IS_221=2.222, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] 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 Ag0Z7Knv6Mj0 for ; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 08:01:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cmccmta.chinamobile.com (cmccmta.chinamobile.com [221.176.64.232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id CA2ED1B31EE for ; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 08:00:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spf.mail.chinamobile.com (unknown[172.16.20.12]) by rmmx-oa_allagent02-12002 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2ee253ad86fedf4-e9df4; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 23:00:14 +0800 (CST) X-RM-TRANSID: 2ee253ad86fedf4-e9df4 Received: from adminPC (unknown[125.97.44.58]) by rmsmtp-oa_rmapp02-12002 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2ee253ad86fb962-639b6; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 23:00:14 +0800 (CST) X-RM-TRANSID: 2ee253ad86fb962-639b6 From: "Fan, Peng" To: "'Karsten Thomann'" References: <20140620075046.6774.27066.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2743128.Zp2sQ9hkCe@e7240.linfre> <004e01cf91e3$dd9580c0$98c08240$@chinamobile.com> <53AD3845.7020603@linfre.de> In-Reply-To: <53AD3845.7020603@linfre.de> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 23:00:44 +0800 Message-ID: <000401cf9218$927fe780$b77fb680$@chinamobile.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQFeuMtRPDgZ9J3EcOufl7BB+nvkbwHXVxqfAloSnGUC7B4dtwEn6RmMnCSPrjA= Content-Language: zh-cn Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sunset4/IrqqRDBhp6o3LzsEj2KdDQZamCA Cc: sunset4@ietf.org Subject: Re: [sunset4] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-fan-sunset4-router-id-00.txt X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 15:01:54 -0000 Hi Karsten, Okay so it is inconvenient at least when we want to get the value of router id from an address. This discussion does remind me of a saying that mixed notation is not suggested... http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/idr/current/msg12901.html Best regards, Peng > -----Original Message----- > From: sunset4 [mailto:sunset4-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Karsten > Thomann > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 5:24 PM > To: Fan, Peng > Cc: sunset4@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [sunset4] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-fan-sunset4- > router-id-00.txt > > Hi, > > The mixed notation can't be used, as it is converted to the hex version > automatically and is stored as the /96 case in hex. > ping 2001:db8::192.168.0.1 > Pinging 2001:db8::c0a8:1 with 32 bytes of data: > > At least im not aware of a device which stores the IPv6 address in mixed > notation, they accept it and convert it to the hex notation in /96, afaik. > > Regards > Karsten > > Am 27.06.2014 10:43, schrieb Fan, Peng: > > Hi Karsten, > > > > Thanks for the comment, please see reply inline [FP]. > > > >> I think the solution area should be extended by another possibility > >> to > > embed > >> IPv4 addresses in v6, as the /96 version has to use the hex version > >> of the > > ID, > > [FP] Perhaps we can use the mixed notation, e.g. 2001:db8::192.168.255.1? > > > >> the use of a /80 could be used to store them in a format like > >> 2001:db8::1921:6825:5001 or 2001:db8::0102:5525:0001. > >> If you like to use an even better readable approach you can also use > >> a /64 > > for > >> addresses like 2001:db8::192:168:255:1. > > [FP] Yes these approaches are quite human-friendly, thanks. > > [FP] We can also consider if there is another solution besides address > > mapping and other ideas in the draft. > > > > Best regards, > > Peng > > > >> Regards > >> Karsten > >> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > sunset4 mailing list > > sunset4@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 > > _______________________________________________ > sunset4 mailing list > sunset4@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4