On 29 May 2013, at 00:57, Michael Sweet msw...@apple.com wrote:
Brian,
On 2013-05-28, at 4:38 PM, Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com
wrote:
I'm increasingly baffled by the use case. If the host is
in a context where it can reach a server *and* has more than
one interface
On 24 May 2013, at 21:50, Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com wrote:
On 25/05/2013 02:43, Tim Chown wrote:
A couple of additional comments.
One is that from time to time there may be security issues raised with
certain headers, e.g. RH0. These may obviously be raised over
Michael Sweet mailto:msw...@apple.com
29 May 2013 01:27
Ray,
On 2013-05-28, at 3:34 PM, Ray Hunter v6...@globis.net wrote:
Warning: post contains dumb questions.
No such thing! :)
...
All of this falls apart with link-local addresses and RFC 6874. Because
the client is required to
IP addresses are designed as topology locator, so that every packet can be
routed to its network destination.
However, even in IPv4 era, some network operators have mapped their IP address
with certain semantic locally. These kind of mechanism explicitly express the
semantic properties of
On 28 May 2013, at 22:07, Alissa Cooper acoo...@cdt.org wrote:
On May 26, 2013, at 9:01 AM, Fernando Gont fg...@si6networks.com wrote:
How about including something along these lines (*) in an Appendix?
(*) Discussion of possible attacks, and what stable privacy addresses do
about them
Michael,
It would be awesome if printers supported Neighbor Discovery, but of the four
printers in my home office only three support IPv6 and only one supports ND.
One of the IPv6 printers is 3 years old, the other three are less than a year
old...
On the client side you'll find a
Hi Ole,
Am 29.05.2013 13:47, schrieb Ole Troan:
confused. a host cannot support IPv6 if it doesn't support ND. could
you please clarify?
I'm not sure that your statement is fully correct.
Though I'm convinced that ND provides many useful
features, in specific environments and rare cases
the
confused. a host cannot support IPv6 if it doesn't support ND. could
you please clarify?
I'm not sure that your statement is fully correct.
Though I'm convinced that ND provides many useful
features, in specific environments and rare cases
the use of ND may be problematic (due to security
Hi Roland,
On 5/29/13 8:46 AM, Bless, Roland (TM) wrote:
Hi Ole,
Am 29.05.2013 13:47, schrieb Ole Troan:
confused. a host cannot support IPv6 if it doesn't support ND. could
you please clarify?
I'm not sure that your statement is fully correct.
Though I'm convinced that ND provides many
Ray,
On 2013-05-29, at 2:52 AM, Ray Hunter v6...@globis.net wrote:
...
Where's the standard that says ZoneID MUST be included in the Host
header? I presume this is rfc2616#page-128.
RFC 2616 just says to use the host and port from the original URI. It doesn't
say anything about IPv6
Ole,
On 2013-05-29, at 7:47 AM, Ole Troan otr...@employees.org wrote:
Michael,
It would be awesome if printers supported Neighbor Discovery, but of the
four printers in my home office only three support IPv6 and only one
supports ND. One of the IPv6 printers is 3 years old, the other
Hi Ole,
Am 29.05.2013 14:49, schrieb Ole Troan:
confused. a host cannot support IPv6 if it doesn't support ND. could
you please clarify?
I'm not sure that your statement is fully correct.
Though I'm convinced that ND provides many useful
features, in specific environments and rare cases
Hi Brian,
Am 29.05.2013 15:00, schrieb Brian Haberman:
On 5/29/13 8:46 AM, Bless, Roland (TM) wrote:
I'm not sure that your statement is fully correct.
Though I'm convinced that ND provides many useful
features, in specific environments and rare cases
the use of ND may be problematic (due to
On 5/29/13 10:59 AM, Bless, Roland (TM) wrote:
Hi Brian,
Am 29.05.2013 15:00, schrieb Brian Haberman:
On 5/29/13 8:46 AM, Bless, Roland (TM) wrote:
I'm not sure that your statement is fully correct.
Though I'm convinced that ND provides many useful
features, in specific environments and rare
Hi Brian,
I was referring to RFC 2460. RFC 6434 states
ND SHOULD be supported, which makes perfectly sense.
In very rare cases you may not be able to use ND
(e.g., if you have a unidirectional medium etc.).
But there are MUSTs sprinkled in that section as well...
The way I read it was:
Ray == Ray Hunter v6...@globis.net writes:
Ray Warning: post contains dumb questions.
good. That usually mean that the document says something dumb.
Michael raised an interesting issue, and we have to analyze
it. The consensus of the working group so far is that interface
On 05/29/2013 04:00 AM, Dave Thaler wrote:
What does draft-ietf-6man-stable-privacy-addresses has to do with CGAs?
1) Both give random-per-network addresses, using Alissa's terminology.
CGA's doesn't seem to aim at stable-per-network addresses. For instance,
the modifier is expected to be
Ray == Ray Hunter v6...@globis.net writes:
What if both the server AND the client have multiple interfaces: how do
they both know which local interface on their own node is mutually
connected and to be used for communication? There's only one single
zoneid in the URI, so
Michael,
On 2013-05-29, at 12:58 PM, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca wrote:
...
I have a stupid question.
What does it mean to have an interface identifier go through an HTTP proxy?
Given that a proxy works by having the client send the entire URL on the
GET line, it means that my
Michael,
On 2013-05-29, at 1:09 PM, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca wrote:
...
Ray How does the very first URI learn the correct ZoneID in the first
place?
Ray Manually.
In a Bonjour/mDNS scenario, the client sees the link-local address on
interface
with zoneID FOO, and
Michael Sweet mailto:msw...@apple.com
29 May 2013 20:13
Michael,
One important point here: we don't send IPv6 link local addresses in
this case, we send the .local hostname that the printer is using. This
avoids the whole issue of IPv6 link-local addresses in URIs, we just
have to deal
Michael,
let me try a restart.
you need to use link-local addresses for the HTTP connection between a client
and a printer.
a link-local address has link-local scope. it is ambiguous outside of the given
link (zone).
see RFC4007.
an application using link-local addresses must be bound to the
Ray,
On May 29, 2013, at 3:10 PM, Ray Hunter v6...@globis.net wrote:
Michael Sweet mailto:msw...@apple.com
29 May 2013 20:13
Michael,
One important point here: we don't send IPv6 link local addresses in
this case, we send the .local hostname that the printer is using. This
avoids the
Hi,
This version is intended to respond to Ray Hunter's comments.
There are two important changes:
1. The MUST NOT that Ray mentioned is now SHOULD NOT. Really
this is a matter of internal consistency in the document, since
the exceptions to the SHOULD NOT are specified, so the MUST NOT
was
Ole,
On May 29, 2013, at 3:40 PM, Ole Troan otr...@employees.org wrote:
...
now the question becomes, what do you do with the embedded URIs containing
link-local addresses?
For a web page, the user would click on links/buttons that open other pages on
the printer.
For an IPP response, the
On 29/05/2013 11:57, Michael Sweet wrote:
Brian,
On 2013-05-28, at 4:38 PM, Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com
wrote:
I'm increasingly baffled by the use case. If the host is
in a context where it can reach a server *and* has more than
one interface (such that a ZoneID is
Personally, I think this is an inherently bad idea.
IP addresses need less overloading of semantics, not more.
We already use IP addresses for two conflicting purposes… Topology locator and
End System Identifier.
This overloading is at the heart of our current scaling issues with respect to
Ole == Ole Troan otr...@employees.org writes:
Ole could you not infer the link-local zone of the referral from
Ole the transport session?
Ole given a link-local transport connection using a link-local
Ole zone, would it ever make
Ole sense that the referrals using
Michael == Michael Sweet msw...@apple.com writes:
Ray How does the very first URI learn the correct ZoneID in the first
place?
Ray Manually.
In a Bonjour/mDNS scenario, the client sees the link-local address on
interface
with zoneID FOO, and records that. The client
I tend to agree with Owen here. In fact, I am curious how an allocation from a
provider to a organization would look? Instead of following standard issuing
practices of a /48, are you suggesting the provider would issue multiple /52s
that follow functional categories (VoIP, management, etc)?
30 matches
Mail list logo
