Re: [v6ops] Could IPv6 address be more than locator?//draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix-03

On May 31, 2013, at 7:22 PM, Ted Lemon wrote: > On May 31, 2013, at 10:14 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: >> The /48 is in order to allow 16 bits of space for automating the deployment >> of hierarchy and routing within the end-site. > > Right, which is ludicrous overkill, given that we have two diffe

Re: [v6ops] Could IPv6 address be more than locator?//draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix-03

On May 30, 2013, at 12:29 PM, Ted Lemon wrote: > On May 30, 2013, at 12:08 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: >> Not a great assumption... They should need 4 million or more /48s since >> every subscriber is at least one end site and every subscriber end site >> should receive a /48. > > I am not in lov

Re: [v6ops] Could IPv6 address be more than locator?//draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix-03

Hi Sheng, Ray, On May 31, 2013, at 3:46 AM, Ray Hunter wrote: [--snip--] > But why are people coming up with these schemes for encoding semantics > in the address prefixes in the first place? That's what I'd like to > understand first and foremost: what lack of functionality is > motivating/forci

Re: [v6ops] Could IPv6 address be more than locator?//draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix-03

On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 11:02 PM, bingxu...@gmail.com wrote: > [Qiong] I'm trying to answer this question from operator's aspect. When we > are trying to encode semantics e.g service type, subscriber type, etc., in > some flag, it should have the following features: > 1) It should exist and be enc

Re: [v6ops] Could IPv6 address be more than locator?//draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix-03

On May 31, 2013, at 10:14 PM, Owen DeLong mailto:o...@delong.com>> wrote: The /48 is in order to allow 16 bits of space for automating the deployment of hierarchy and routing within the end-site. Right, which is ludicrous overkill, given that we have two different solutions for the problem of e

Re: Comments on draft-ietf-6man-stable-privacy-addresses-07

On 05/28/2013 11:07 PM, Alissa Cooper wrote: >>> The second group of three are for nodes that only use temporary >>> addresses (but that also configure a stable address that never >>> gets used). This is what would be expected by users that want to >>> avoid correlation attacks, assuming their adm

Re: Comments on draft-ietf-6man-stable-privacy-addresses-07

On 05/24/2013 03:22 PM, Tim Chown wrote: > >> I've tweaked the text a bit in the hopes that readers don't get the >> impression that I'm arguing against use of RFC4941. (Most likely, >> by the time you read this I'll have posted version -08... so please >> check that one... and if there's still ro

Re: Revision of draft-ietf-6man-stable-privacy-addresses

Hi, Tim, On 05/22/2013 10:50 AM, Tim Chown wrote: > > On 21 May 2013, at 03:00, Fernando Gont wrote: >> >> Additionally, I'd like to better understand the stability properties of >> UUIDs (and add some text about it right after the text that you have >> suggested). My assumption is that one woul

Re: [v6ops] Could IPv6 address be more than locator?//draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix-03

Hi Ted and all, On 2013-5-31, at 19:37, Ted Lemon wrote: > On May 31, 2013, at 5:46 AM, Ray Hunter wrote: >> I was suggesting looking at using a tag option within an existing header >> (the hop by hop header), which theoretically is already processed by all >> nodes along the path. So new optio

Re: [v6ops] Could IPv6 address be more than locator?//draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix-03

Hi, On 31 maj 2013, at 09:37, Sheng Jiang wrote: > Hi, Ray, > > Thanks for your suggestion. Hop-by-hop header options may also be alternative > for this. Extra headers is a no-go for efficient FIB-lookup and thus a waste of time in many aspects to standardize. My 2 cents. Regards, Martin

New PDM Destination Option Proposed

All, Please comment on a new Destination Option that we are proposing: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-elkins-6man-ipv6-pdm-dest-option/ There are two documents which give the background: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-elkins-v6ops-ipv6-end-to-end-rt-needed/ https://datatracker

Re: [v6ops] Could IPv6 address be more than locator?//draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix-03

On May 31, 2013, at 5:46 AM, Ray Hunter wrote: > I was suggesting looking at using a tag option within an existing header > (the hop by hop header), which theoretically is already processed by all > nodes along the path. So new options rather than a new header. Right, but the hop-by-hop header do

Re: Comments on draft-ietf-6man-stable-privacy-addresses-07

On 05/30/2013 06:09 PM, Dave Thaler wrote: >> Isn't it enough simply noting that the target node can be probed? >> Getting into the specific details of the probe packet >> (stimulus/response) seems like "over-specifying" things to me... > > My opinion is that this example is important, since the e

Re: [v6ops] Could IPv6 address be more than locator?//draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix-03

> Martin Millnert > 31 May 2013 11:14 > Hi, > > On 31 maj 2013, at 09:37, Sheng Jiang wrote: > > > > Extra headers is a no-go for efficient FIB-lookup and thus a waste of > time in many aspects to standardize. > > My 2 cents. > > Regards, > Martin I was suggesting lo

RE: Could IPv6 address be more than locator?//draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix-03

>> Actually, my motivation is NOT to sell this mechanism to anyone. My >observation is some network operators, both ISPs and enterprise network >operator, has such address plan, or already in use. We, as IETF, cannot stop >them. So, we should document and analyze this mechanism. This should give >s

Re: Could IPv6 address be more than locator?//draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix-03

On 31 May 2013, at 08:37, Sheng Jiang wrote: > > Actually, my motivation is NOT to sell this mechanism to anyone. My > observation is some network operators, both ISPs and enterprise network > operator, has such address plan, or already in use. We, as IETF, cannot stop > them. So, we should do

RE: Could IPv6 address be more than locator?//draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix-03

>> 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

Re: [v6ops] Could IPv6 address be more than locator?//draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix-03

Hi Sheng, For reference, Deutsche Telekom's Peter Löthberg brainchild-project Terastream puts locally significant information in IPv6 addresses (recreating some sort of label switching/routing). It's currently being deployed in Croatia. Regards, Martin On 29 maj 2013, at 09:06, Sheng Jiang wr

Re: [v6ops] Could IPv6 address be more than locator?//draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix-03

Hi Sheng, On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Sheng Jiang wrote: > Comparing giving 16 bits for subscribers, which rarely use it or we > still have no concrete idea how this will be used, the semantic bits on the > provider side looks more helpful. > > ** ** > > Or provider may designate the