From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Fri Jan 1 08:00:04 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 756A23A6A24 for ; Fri, 1 Jan 2010 08:00:04 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: <0jRi4xaRuRcw> X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Fri, 1 Jan 2010 07:59:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from abrahamsons.co.uk (unknown [188.186.93.143]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B01673A69BD for ; Fri, 1 Jan 2010 07:59:54 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: User v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org get 72 discount on ALL Pfizer To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100101155955.B01673A69BD@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 1 Jan 2010 07:59:54 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 84456 Inc. All rights reserved.

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Fri Jan 1 08:27:18 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 843E93A67EC for ; Fri, 1 Jan 2010 08:27:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.687 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.687 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_DATE_PAST_20XX=10.357, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.552, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DfKmtOZFKoqG for ; Fri, 1 Jan 2010 08:27:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from host28.201-252-248.telecom.net.ar (host28.201-252-248.telecom.net.ar [201.252.248.28]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E68AF3A6841 for ; Fri, 1 Jan 2010 08:27:10 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100101162710.E68AF3A6841@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 1 Jan 2010 08:27:10 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 QOAYDEH. All rights reserved.
From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Fri Jan 1 08:27:32 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8DC83A67EC for ; Fri, 1 Jan 2010 08:27:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.687 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.687 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_DATE_PAST_20XX=10.357, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.552, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Hq2l1usgzm+E for ; Fri, 1 Jan 2010 08:27:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from host28.201-252-248.telecom.net.ar (host28.201-252-248.telecom.net.ar [201.252.248.28]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD1433A6841 for ; Fri, 1 Jan 2010 08:27:22 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100101162723.BD1433A6841@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 1 Jan 2010 08:27:22 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 TOCEAAKYD. All rights reserved.
From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Fri Jan 1 21:27:53 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6774E3A68B4 for ; Fri, 1 Jan 2010 21:27:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -48.177 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-48.177 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[FH_DATE_PAST_20XX=10.357, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.808, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.55, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.556, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.672, NUMERIC_HTTP_ADDR=0.001, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=2.188, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=1.117, RCVD_IN_XBL=2.896, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.617, URIBL_BLACK=20, URI_HEX=1.316, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FW-5Af+KDNVT for ; Fri, 1 Jan 2010 21:27:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from 99-166-102-106.lightspeed.tukrga.sbcglobal.net (99-166-102-106.lightspeed.tukrga.sbcglobal.net [99.166.102.106]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41DAC3A68AC for ; Fri, 1 Jan 2010 21:27:46 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100102052746.41DAC3A68AC@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 1 Jan 2010 21:27:46 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Ywyljs Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Fri Jan 1 21:28:05 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E62E83A68AC for ; Fri, 1 Jan 2010 21:28:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -48.177 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-48.177 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[FH_DATE_PAST_20XX=10.357, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.808, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.55, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.556, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.672, NUMERIC_HTTP_ADDR=0.001, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=2.188, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=1.117, RCVD_IN_XBL=2.896, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.617, URIBL_BLACK=20, URI_HEX=1.316, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mW9gFhYlqeTM for ; Fri, 1 Jan 2010 21:27:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from 99-166-102-106.lightspeed.tukrga.sbcglobal.net (99-166-102-106.lightspeed.tukrga.sbcglobal.net [99.166.102.106]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09F3E3A68AD for ; Fri, 1 Jan 2010 21:27:58 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100102052759.09F3E3A68AD@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 1 Jan 2010 21:27:58 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Fjnqyneidipe Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Fri Jan 1 21:29:12 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BE3B3A68AD for ; Fri, 1 Jan 2010 21:29:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -48.178 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-48.178 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[FH_DATE_PAST_20XX=10.357, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.808, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.55, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.556, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.672, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=2.188, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=1.117, RCVD_IN_XBL=2.896, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.617, URIBL_BLACK=20, URI_HEX=1.316, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Qa6vo7OJerWt for ; Fri, 1 Jan 2010 21:29:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from 99-166-102-106.lightspeed.tukrga.sbcglobal.net (99-166-102-106.lightspeed.tukrga.sbcglobal.net [99.166.102.106]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FAAE3A68AC for ; Fri, 1 Jan 2010 21:29:05 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100102052905.6FAAE3A68AC@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 1 Jan 2010 21:29:05 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Jhqyky Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Sat Jan 2 05:47:18 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC9C93A67FB for ; Sat, 2 Jan 2010 05:47:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.148 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.148 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[FH_DATE_PAST_20XX=10.357, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_BR=0.955, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HELO_EQ_TELESP=1.245, HOST_EQ_BR=1.295, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=2.207, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.55, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.672, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.509, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=1.615, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=1.117, RCVD_IN_XBL=2.896, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, SARE_RECV_SPAM_DOMN02=1.666, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.617, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=1.316, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id p8jTn9dbe21A for ; Sat, 2 Jan 2010 05:47:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from 201-0-70-44.dsl.telesp.net.br (201-0-70-44.dsl.telesp.net.br [201.0.70.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0ACE3A67A7 for ; Sat, 2 Jan 2010 05:47:11 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100102134711.A0ACE3A67A7@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 2 Jan 2010 05:47:11 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 YOIHIW. All rights reserved.
From vaa20870@ietf.org Sat Jan 2 16:02:26 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DBE83A686A for ; Sat, 2 Jan 2010 16:02:26 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Sat, 2 Jan 2010 16:02:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from 93-81-133-206.broadband.corbina.ru (93-81-133-206.broadband.corbina.ru [93.81.133.206]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 916313A6835 for ; Sat, 2 Jan 2010 16:02:14 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: please read To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100103000218.916313A6835@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 2 Jan 2010 16:02:14 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 78243 Inc. All rights reserved.

From secmech-request@lists.ietf.org Sun Jan 3 06:52:13 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B6633A682B for ; Sun, 3 Jan 2010 06:52:13 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Sun, 3 Jan 2010 06:52:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from 77-23-20-239-dynip.superkabel.de (77-23-20-239-dynip.superkabel.de [77.23.20.239]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B0F153A6803 for ; Sun, 3 Jan 2010 06:52:01 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: User v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org get 82 discount on ALL Brands To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100103145205.B0F153A6803@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 3 Jan 2010 06:52:01 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 21881 Inc. All rights reserved.

From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Sun Jan 3 11:45:51 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A3603A67D1 for ; Sun, 3 Jan 2010 11:45:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -28.446 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-28.446 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[FH_DATE_PAST_20XX=10.357, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_CZ=0.445, HOST_EQ_CZ=0.904, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.808, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.55, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.556, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.672, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=2.188, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=1.117, RCVD_IN_XBL=2.896, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_SBL=20, URI_HEX=1.316, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id y+L2rNRyKeGm for ; Sun, 3 Jan 2010 11:45:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from 79-127-226-191-eth2-gwly-user.802.cz (79-127-226-191-eth2-gwly-user.802.cz [79.127.226.191]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADCBC3A67B0 for ; Sun, 3 Jan 2010 11:45:42 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100103194542.ADCBC3A67B0@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 3 Jan 2010 11:45:42 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Suaze Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Sun Jan 3 11:47:31 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FD773A67FD for ; Sun, 3 Jan 2010 11:47:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -28.446 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-28.446 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[FH_DATE_PAST_20XX=10.357, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_CZ=0.445, HOST_EQ_CZ=0.904, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.808, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.55, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.556, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.672, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=2.188, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=1.117, RCVD_IN_XBL=2.896, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_SBL=20, URI_HEX=1.316, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id a7BTT9m7jYEh for ; Sun, 3 Jan 2010 11:47:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from 79-127-226-191-eth2-gwly-user.802.cz (79-127-226-191-eth2-gwly-user.802.cz [79.127.226.191]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C19F3A67D1 for ; Sun, 3 Jan 2010 11:47:23 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100103194724.0C19F3A67D1@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 3 Jan 2010 11:47:23 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Xqgisyciara Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Sun Jan 3 11:47:48 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F29C3A67B0 for ; Sun, 3 Jan 2010 11:47:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -28.446 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-28.446 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[FH_DATE_PAST_20XX=10.357, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_CZ=0.445, HOST_EQ_CZ=0.904, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.808, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.55, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.556, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.672, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=2.188, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=1.117, RCVD_IN_XBL=2.896, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_SBL=20, URI_HEX=1.316, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CnZ2tG2vVdtT for ; Sun, 3 Jan 2010 11:47:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from 79-127-226-191-eth2-gwly-user.802.cz (79-127-226-191-eth2-gwly-user.802.cz [79.127.226.191]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59F0E3A67D1 for ; Sun, 3 Jan 2010 11:47:40 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100103194740.59F0E3A67D1@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 3 Jan 2010 11:47:40 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Olatq Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Mon Jan 4 07:06:00 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4394D3A69B9 for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 07:06:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -39.528 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-39.528 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[FH_DATE_PAST_20XX=10.357, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HELO_EQ_HU=1.35, HOST_EQ_HU=1.245, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.808, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.55, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.556, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.672, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=2.188, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.509, RCVD_IN_XBL=2.896, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=1.316, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LqHmSIIW4VqX for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 07:05:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from 4d6f4862.adsl.enternet.hu (4d6f4862.adsl.enternet.hu [77.111.72.98]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9A953A69B6 for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 07:05:52 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100104150552.D9A953A69B6@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 07:05:52 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Togqmoze Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Mon Jan 4 07:07:22 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB9723A69B6 for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 07:07:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -39.528 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-39.528 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[FH_DATE_PAST_20XX=10.357, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HELO_EQ_HU=1.35, HOST_EQ_HU=1.245, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.808, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.55, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.556, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.672, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=2.188, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.509, RCVD_IN_XBL=2.896, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=1.316, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RI0iKCsAHYu9 for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 07:07:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from 4d6f4862.adsl.enternet.hu (4d6f4862.adsl.enternet.hu [77.111.72.98]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B3BC3A688D for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 07:07:14 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100104150714.4B3BC3A688D@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 07:07:14 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Kyzoliva Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Mon Jan 4 07:09:35 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C4EE28C10D for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 07:09:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -22.028 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-22.028 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[FH_DATE_PAST_20XX=10.357, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HELO_EQ_HU=1.35, HOST_EQ_HU=1.245, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.808, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.55, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.556, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.672, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=2.188, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.509, RCVD_IN_XBL=2.896, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URI_HEX=1.316, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1TThCRIrk-xk for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 07:09:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from 4d6f4862.adsl.enternet.hu (4d6f4862.adsl.enternet.hu [77.111.72.98]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24A7428C0E7 for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 07:09:27 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100104150928.24A7428C0E7@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 07:09:27 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Kqajenibu Corporation.
All rights reserved

From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 4 07:53:44 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C48D53A6859 for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 07:53:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -93.643 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-93.643 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[FH_DATE_PAST_20XX=10.357, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QJO2MqVFwDAm for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 07:53:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C10643A6825 for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 07:53:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NRp7e-000Atu-Gb for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 04 Jan 2010 15:45:34 +0000 Received: from [64.102.122.148] (helo=rtp-iport-1.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NRp7T-000AtA-1F for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 04 Jan 2010 15:45:23 +0000 Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEABCcQUtAZnwM/2dsb2JhbADAR5NOhDAE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.47,499,1257120000"; d="scan'208";a="78042849" Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com ([64.102.124.12]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 04 Jan 2010 15:45:21 +0000 Received: from stealth-10-32-244-220.cisco.com (stealth-10-32-244-220.cisco.com [10.32.244.220]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o04FjK30022139; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 15:45:21 GMT Message-Id: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> From: Fred Baker To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Subject: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 07:45:12 -0800 Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se, rbonica@juniper.net X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936) Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: This is to initiate a two week working group last call of draft-ietf- v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt. Please read it now. If you find nits (spelling errors, minor suggested wording changes, etc), comment to the authors; if you find greater issues, such as disagreeing with a statement or finding additional issues that need to be addressed, please post your comments to the list. We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the document as well as its content. If you have read the document and believe it to be of operational utility, that is also an important comment to make. On Dec 18, 2009, at 2:45 AM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the IETF. Title : Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge Routers Author(s) : H. Singh, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Pages : 14 Date : 2009-12-18 This document specifies requirements for an IPv6 Customer Edge (CE) router. Specifically, the current version of this document focuses on the provisioning of an IPv6 CE router and the provisioning of IPv6 hosts attached to it. Status of this Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. This Internet-Draft will expire on June 21, 2010. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the BSD License. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. _______________________________________________ I-D-Announce mailing list I-D-Announce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt http://www.ipinc.net/IPv4.GIF From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Mon Jan 4 10:30:14 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA2BB28C0EE for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 10:30:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -31.938 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-31.938 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[FH_DATE_PAST_20XX=10.357, HELO_EQ_PL=1.135, HOST_EQ_PL=1.95, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=2.207, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.55, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.672, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=2.188, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.509, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=1.615, RCVD_IN_XBL=2.896, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=1.316, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TIITw8xcXmCM for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 10:30:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from chello089074092217.chello.pl (chello089074092217.chello.pl [89.74.92.217]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BBCE28C0D9 for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 10:30:11 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100104183012.1BBCE28C0D9@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 10:30:11 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 UZEMIX. All rights reserved.
From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Mon Jan 4 10:30:29 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6B773A694A for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 10:30:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.562 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.562 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[FH_DATE_PAST_20XX=10.357, HELO_EQ_PL=1.135, HOST_EQ_PL=1.95, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=2.207, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.55, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.672, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=2.188, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.509, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=1.615, RCVD_IN_XBL=2.896, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=1.316, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Q84esT9JWmTO for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 10:30:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from chello089074092217.chello.pl (chello089074092217.chello.pl [89.74.92.217]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CAA23A6898 for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 10:30:28 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100104183028.3CAA23A6898@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 10:30:28 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 XEIJUF. All rights reserved.
From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Mon Jan 4 10:30:30 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AD7D3A68FE for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 10:30:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -29.438 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-29.438 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[FH_DATE_PAST_20XX=10.357, HELO_EQ_PL=1.135, HOST_EQ_PL=1.95, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=2.207, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.55, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.672, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=2.188, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.509, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=1.615, RCVD_IN_XBL=2.896, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=1.316, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WzhSoHLKlKOt for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 10:30:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from chello089074092217.chello.pl (chello089074092217.chello.pl [89.74.92.217]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05ADB3A67AB for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 10:30:23 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100104183024.05ADB3A67AB@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 10:30:23 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 YASAKAHUMY. All rights reserved.
From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 4 17:09:13 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 960B13A69E4 for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 17:09:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BQD5-u-ALNj9 for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 17:09:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 445AC3A69DF for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 17:09:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NRxnN-0009P5-Ko for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 01:01:13 +0000 Received: from [130.76.96.56] (helo=stl-smtpout-01.boeing.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NRxnH-0009O5-2T for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 01:01:07 +0000 Received: from stl-av-01.boeing.com (stl-av-01.boeing.com [192.76.190.6]) by stl-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/8.14.0/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id o0510ckX022094 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 4 Jan 2010 19:00:39 -0600 (CST) Received: from stl-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by stl-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o0510cQY017245; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 19:00:38 -0600 (CST) Received: from XCH-NWHT-09.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwht-09.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.25.115]) by stl-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o0510c9I017221 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Mon, 4 Jan 2010 19:00:38 -0600 (CST) Received: from XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.64.97]) by XCH-NWHT-09.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.25.115]) with mapi; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 17:00:37 -0800 From: "Templin, Fred L" To: Fred Baker , "v6ops@ops.ietf.org" CC: "kurtis@kurtis.pp.se" , "rbonica@juniper.net" Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 17:00:33 -0800 Subject: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Topic: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Index: AcqNWC7D0NSBCdUKTgCgAaETCoD48wAQ+Gfg Message-ID: References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Fred, A concern I raised on the list a while back centers around the behavior of the CPE router acting as a host on its WAN interface per section 4.1: "When the router is attached to the WAN interface link it must act as an IPv6 host for the purposes of stateless or stateful interface address assignment ([RFC4862]/[RFC3315])." and per WPD-3: "WPD-3: Absent of other routing information the IPv6 CE router MUST use Router Discovery as specified in [RFC4861] to discover a default router and install a default route in its routing table with the discovered router's address as the next-hop." To my understanding, this behavior would involve the CPE router sending Router Solicitation (RS) messages on its WAN interface in order to receive Router Advertisement (RA) messages. According to Section 6.2.6 of RFC4861, however: "Whether or not a Source Link-Layer Address option is provided, if a Neighbor Cache entry for the (RS)'s sender exists (or is created) the entry's IsRouter flag MUST be set to FALSE." RFC4861 goes to some level of detail to specify the setting of the IsRouter flag under various circumstances (including the RS case), but it only says what actions should be taken based on the flag as result of receiving Neighbor Advertisement messages. Other actions based on the IsRouter flag setting do not seem to be specified. In the linux kernel, it appears that the kernel will in some circumstances garbage-collect FIB entries that have a nexthop with the IsRouter flag set to FALSE. It is not clear what other router implementations would do based on the IsRouter setting, but it seems odd that the IsRouter flag in neighbor cache entries corresponding to CPE routers would be set to FALSE which in the linux case at least may lead to interoperability issues. As a result, it might be worth reconsidering whether it is appropriate for the CPE router to send an RS which might confuse other routers into thinking it is a host. Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On Behal= f Of Fred Baker > Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 7:45 AM > To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org > Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net > Subject: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC >=20 > This is to initiate a two week working group last call of draft-ietf- > v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt. Please read it now. If you find nits > (spelling errors, minor suggested wording changes, etc), comment to > the authors; if you find greater issues, such as disagreeing with a > statement or finding additional issues that need to be addressed, > please post your comments to the list. >=20 > We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the > document as well as its content. If you have read the document and > believe it to be of operational utility, that is also an important > comment to make. >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Dec 18, 2009, at 2:45 AM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: >=20 > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the > IETF. >=20 >=20 > Title : Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge Routers > Author(s) : H. Singh, et al. > Filename : draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt > Pages : 14 > Date : 2009-12-18 >=20 > This document specifies requirements for an IPv6 Customer Edge (CE) > router. Specifically, the current version of this document focuses > on the provisioning of an IPv6 CE router and the provisioning of IPv6 > hosts attached to it. >=20 > Status of this Memo >=20 > This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the > provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. >=20 > Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering > Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that > other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- > Drafts. >=20 > Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months > and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any > time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference > material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." >=20 > The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at > http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. >=20 > The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. >=20 > This Internet-Draft will expire on June 21, 2010. >=20 > Copyright Notice >=20 > Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the > document authors. All rights reserved. >=20 > This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal > Provisions Relating to IETF Documents > (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of > publication of this document. Please review these documents > carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect > to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must > include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of > the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as > described in the BSD License. >=20 > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.t= xt >=20 > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >=20 > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > Internet-Draft. > _______________________________________________ > I-D-Announce mailing list > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html > or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >=20 > http://www.ipinc.net/IPv4.GIF >=20 From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 02:32:59 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59F6F3A6901 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 02:32:59 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: <8Xbzrf3KjyQD> X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 02:32:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from triband-mum-59.183.178.54.mtnl.net.in (triband-mum-59.183.139.20.mtnl.net.in [59.183.139.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 74E363A68B3 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 02:32:51 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: Member v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org get 84 0FF on ALL Pfizer To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100105103251.74E363A68B3@core3.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 02:32:51 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 61619 Inc. All rights reserved.

From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 06:34:30 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 079AD3A6933 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 06:34:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gM0N3RJAqw4n for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 06:34:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C8893A63C9 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 06:34:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSAMB-0004zi-N5 for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 14:25:59 +0000 Received: from [64.102.122.148] (helo=rtp-iport-1.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSAM4-0004yT-OD for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 14:25:53 +0000 Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEANHaQkutJV2Z/2dsb2JhbAC+f5RUhDAE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.47,505,1257120000"; d="scan'208";a="78292354" Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Jan 2010 14:25:51 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com [72.163.62.200]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o05EPph9014316; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:25:51 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-114.cisco.com ([72.163.62.156]) by xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 5 Jan 2010 08:25:51 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 08:25:49 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Index: AcqNWC7D0NSBCdUKTgCgAaETCoD48wAQ+GfgAAtQ+EA= References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> From: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" To: "Templin, Fred L" , "Fred Baker (fred)" , Cc: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Jan 2010 14:25:51.0160 (UTC) FILETIME=[FB62EB80:01CA8E12] Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: -----Original Message----- >From: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Templin, Fred L >Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 8:01 PM >To: Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops.ietf.org >Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net >Subject: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) >Fred, >A concern I raised on the list a while back centers around >the behavior of the CPE router acting as a host on its WAN >interface per section 4.1: 6man hasn't even agreed with you as to what is the problem with your IsRouter flag discussion. > "When the router is attached to the WAN interface link it must act as > an IPv6 host for the purposes of stateless or stateful interface > address assignment ([RFC4862]/[RFC3315])." >and per WPD-3: > "WPD-3: Absent of other routing information the IPv6 CE router MUST > use Router Discovery as specified in [RFC4861] to discover a > default router and install a default route in its routing > table with the discovered router's address as the next-hop." >To my understanding, this behavior would involve the CPE >router sending Router Solicitation (RS) messages on its >WAN interface in order to receive Router Advertisement (RA) >messages. According to Section 6.2.6 of RFC4861, however: > "Whether or not a Source Link-Layer > Address option is provided, if a Neighbor Cache entry for the > (RS)'s sender exists (or is created) the entry's IsRouter flag > MUST be set to FALSE." >RFC4861 goes to some level of detail to specify the setting >of the IsRouter flag under various circumstances (including >the RS case), but it only says what actions should be taken >based on the flag as result of receiving Neighbor Advertisement >messages. Other actions based on the IsRouter flag setting do >not seem to be specified. Not quite. By default the IsRouter flag is set of FALSE. Also, see Appendix D of RFC 4861. >In the linux kernel, it appears that the kernel will in some >circumstances garbage-collect FIB entries that have a nexthop >with the IsRouter flag set to FALSE. It is not clear what other >router implementations would do based on the IsRouter setting, >but it seems odd that the IsRouter flag in neighbor cache >entries corresponding to CPE routers would be set to FALSE >which in the linux case at least may lead to interoperability issues. What specific interoperability issues? What specific circumstances? Further, since the FIB includes the Destination Cache, note that NUD purges entries in the Destination Cache. Garbage collection can remove an entry from the Default Router List - every entry in the Default Router List is a router. NUD can also purge entries in the Neighbor cache. If the CE Router sends an RS from its WAN interface, the router receiving such and RS sets the IsRouter flag for the CE Router entry to FALSE. So what? When the CE Router requests a delegated prefix, the delegating router will know the CE Router is requesting router.=20 Hemant From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 07:40:47 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E6EA28C10A for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 07:40:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -63.96 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-63.96 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_BLACK=20, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UvCm-KN6G6lu for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 07:40:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from host249.190-231-247.telecom.net.ar (host249.190-231-247.telecom.net.ar [190.231.247.249]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2026D3A68A3 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 07:40:41 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100105154042.2026D3A68A3@core3.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 07:40:41 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Jxqqfarom Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 07:41:14 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A47EA3A68A3 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 07:41:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -66.46 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-66.46 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_BLACK=20, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N0dqyqU5AVyO for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 07:41:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from host249.190-231-247.telecom.net.ar (host249.190-231-247.telecom.net.ar [190.231.247.249]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFCC328C101 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 07:41:05 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100105154105.EFCC328C101@core3.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 07:41:05 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Erjnua Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Tue Jan 5 07:42:43 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7173628C12A for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 07:42:43 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -46.46 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-46.46 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_SBL=20, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EDp5Q7sE-Q5n for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 07:42:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from host249.190-231-247.telecom.net.ar (host249.190-231-247.telecom.net.ar [190.231.247.249]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD9A128C104 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 07:42:34 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100105154234.DD9A128C104@core3.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 07:42:34 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Jroikjfysy Corporation.
All rights reserved

From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 09:06:18 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10ECA3A692C for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 09:06:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JzIa+BlVXPgx for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 09:06:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D137128C167 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 09:06:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSClC-0000d0-HJ for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:59:58 +0000 Received: from [130.76.32.69] (helo=blv-smtpout-01.boeing.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSCl6-0000au-4P for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:59:52 +0000 Received: from slb-av-01.boeing.com (slb-av-01.boeing.com [129.172.13.4]) by blv-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/8.14.0/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id o05GxfNd027567 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 5 Jan 2010 08:59:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from slb-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by slb-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o05Gxffw024836; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 08:59:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NWHT-02.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwht-02.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.70.248]) by slb-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o05GxfgG024823 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Tue, 5 Jan 2010 08:59:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.64.97]) by XCH-NWHT-02.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.70.248]) with mapi; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 08:59:41 -0800 From: "Templin, Fred L" To: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" , "Fred Baker (fred)" , "v6ops@ops.ietf.org" CC: "kurtis@kurtis.pp.se" , "rbonica@juniper.net" Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 08:59:40 -0800 Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Topic: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Index: AcqNWC7D0NSBCdUKTgCgAaETCoD48wAQ+GfgAAtQ+EAAFkkNcA== Message-ID: References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hemant, > -----Original Message----- > From: Hemant Singh (shemant) [mailto:shemant@cisco.com] > Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 6:26 AM > To: Templin, Fred L; Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops.ietf.org > Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net > Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ie= tf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router- > 03.txt WGLC) >=20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > >From: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Templin, Fred L > >Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 8:01 PM > >To: Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops.ietf.org > >Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net > >Subject: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) >=20 > >Fred, >=20 > >A concern I raised on the list a while back centers around > >the behavior of the CPE router acting as a host on its WAN > >interface per section 4.1: >=20 > 6man hasn't even agreed with you as to what is the problem with your > IsRouter flag discussion. The IsRouter discussion was on this list (v6ops); not the 6man list. Maybe you were talking about a different discussion on the 6man list? > > "When the router is attached to the WAN interface link it must act as > > an IPv6 host for the purposes of stateless or stateful interface > > address assignment ([RFC4862]/[RFC3315])." >=20 > >and per WPD-3: >=20 > > "WPD-3: Absent of other routing information the IPv6 CE router MUST > > use Router Discovery as specified in [RFC4861] to discover a > > default router and install a default route in its routing > > table with the discovered router's address as the next-hop." >=20 > >To my understanding, this behavior would involve the CPE > >router sending Router Solicitation (RS) messages on its > >WAN interface in order to receive Router Advertisement (RA) > >messages. According to Section 6.2.6 of RFC4861, however: >=20 > > "Whether or not a Source Link-Layer > > Address option is provided, if a Neighbor Cache entry for the > > (RS)'s sender exists (or is created) the entry's IsRouter flag > > MUST be set to FALSE." >=20 > >RFC4861 goes to some level of detail to specify the setting > >of the IsRouter flag under various circumstances (including > >the RS case), but it only says what actions should be taken > >based on the flag as result of receiving Neighbor Advertisement > >messages. Other actions based on the IsRouter flag setting do > >not seem to be specified. >=20 > Not quite. By default the IsRouter flag is set of FALSE. Also, see > Appendix D of RFC 4861. Yes, I include Appendix D in what I am meaning when I say that "RFC4861 goes to some level of detail to specify the setting of the IsRouter flag". But, it still doesn't say what actions (if any) a host or router should take based on the IsRouter setting. The final sentence of Appendix D also says: "In these cases, a subsequent Neighbor Advertisement or Router Advertisement message will set the correct IsRouter value." but if the CPE will not send any RA messages over its WAN interface then the NA is the only other option for setting the correct IsRouter value. > >In the linux kernel, it appears that the kernel will in some > >circumstances garbage-collect FIB entries that have a nexthop > >with the IsRouter flag set to FALSE. It is not clear what other > >router implementations would do based on the IsRouter setting, > >but it seems odd that the IsRouter flag in neighbor cache > >entries corresponding to CPE routers would be set to FALSE > >which in the linux case at least may lead to interoperability > issues. >=20 > What specific interoperability issues? What specific circumstances? If a provider router garbage-collects a FIB entry because it sees that IsRouter in the nexthop nbr cache entry is FALSE, the FIB entry is gone and there is no route to the CE router's prefixes. That is what I am meaning to say regarding interoperability issues and circumstances. > Further, since the FIB includes the Destination Cache, note that NUD > purges entries in the Destination Cache. Garbage collection can remove > an entry from the Default Router List - every entry in the Default > Router List is a router. NUD can also purge entries in the Neighbor > cache. If the CE Router sends an RS from its WAN interface, the router > receiving such and RS sets the IsRouter flag for the CE Router entry to > FALSE. So what? When the CE Router requests a delegated prefix, the > delegating router will know the CE Router is requesting router. First, the delegating router need not be co-resident on the provider router that sends RA to the CE router; it could be behind a chain of relays instead. Second, just because the delegating router (and I guess also any relays in the chain) come to know that the CE router is a requesting router does not necessarily mean that the provider router will know enough to reach into its kernel and set the IsRouter flag in the nbr cache entry to TRUE. Or, maybe that behavior is specified somewhere that I didn't see? I know about the RAAN option draft, and I can see that the intent there is to have the relays in the chain come to know about delegated prefixes so that they can inject them into the routing system. But, that document does not seem to discuss interactions with the IPv6 ND protocol, including the setting of the IsRouter flag. It also seems that DHCP prefix delegation is being used as a routing protocol. The alternative is to use IPv6 ND RAs as a routing protocol. Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com =20 > Hemant From urn-nid-web-archivedd@ietf.org Tue Jan 5 09:34:34 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 675D928C13C for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 09:34:34 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 09:34:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from acoulab.com (unknown [189.135.205.60]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 2DF0928C186 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 09:34:12 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: Personal 70% off To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100105173418.2DF0928C186@core3.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 09:34:12 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 56068 Inc. All rights reserved.

From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 11:01:25 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C63D3A6893 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 11:01:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J+90sqG1VNhp for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 11:01:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 625FE3A67C2 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 11:01:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSEXG-000DeH-G0 for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 18:53:42 +0000 Received: from [17.254.13.23] (helo=mail-out4.apple.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSEXA-000Ddv-GJ for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 18:53:36 +0000 Received: from relay11.apple.com (relay11.apple.com [17.128.113.48]) by mail-out4.apple.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0903E851F745 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 10:53:36 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: 11807130-b7b0aae00000102c-93-4b438aafac60 Received: from il0602a-dhcp117.apple.com (il0602a-dhcp117.apple.com [17.206.23.245]) (using TLS with cipher AES128-SHA (AES128-SHA/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by relay11.apple.com (Apple SCV relay) with SMTP id AB.C7.04140.FAA834B4; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 10:53:36 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Subject: Re: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) From: james woodyatt In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 10:53:35 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <94A05B7E-28B2-4BB5-891C-BDD91B23FDE5@apple.com> References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> To: IPv6 Operations X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAZE= Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Jan 5, 2010, at 08:59, Templin, Fred L wrote: >=20 > The final sentence of Appendix D also says: >=20 > "In these cases, a subsequent Neighbor > Advertisement or Router Advertisement message will set > the correct IsRouter value." >=20 > but if the CPE will not send any RA messages over its > WAN interface then the NA is the only other option for > setting the correct IsRouter value. Perhaps, now would be a good time for me to reiterate my complaint that = we don't have a good zero-configuration, stateless routing protocol = built into ICMP6. RA and RS are conceptually tied to the roles of = default router and host, specifically, and they quite unsuitable for use = in a model where a host on one prefix is also a router for another, = delegated, prefix. I'm inclined to think we should take the Route Information Option from = RFC 4191 and define a way to add it to the Neighbor Advertisement = message. -- james woodyatt member of technical staff, communications engineering From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 11:03:22 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 117323A683F for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 11:03:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -108.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-108.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EyHtaaR5l7ps for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 11:03:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9CE73A67C2 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 11:03:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSEeH-000EWu-KC for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 19:00:57 +0000 Received: from [171.68.10.87] (helo=sj-iport-5.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSEeB-000ETX-EN for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 19:00:51 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-5.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,224,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="128734630" Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.223.137]) by sj-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Jan 2010 19:00:49 +0000 Received: from dwingwxp01 ([10.32.240.197]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o05J0nGV016291; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 19:00:49 GMT From: "Dan Wing" To: "'Fred Baker'" , Cc: , , References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> Subject: RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 11:00:49 -0800 Message-ID: <048501ca8e39$65613570$c5f0200a@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> Thread-Index: AcqNVhc8WYf6qTZDQRCfi0Wtm53jbQA3U77w X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org > [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Fred Baker > Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 7:45 AM > To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org > Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net > Subject: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC > > This is to initiate a two week working group last call of draft-ietf- > v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt. Please read it now. If you find nits > (spelling errors, minor suggested wording changes, etc), comment to > the authors; if you find greater issues, such as disagreeing with a > statement or finding additional issues that need to be addressed, > please post your comments to the list. > > We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the > document as well as its content. If you have read the document and > believe it to be of operational utility, that is also an important > comment to make. Document seems useful. I have an issue with L-9, "The IPv6 CE router MUST support providing DNS information in the DHCP DNS_SERVERS option [RFC3646]". This prevents a network from operating both IPv6-only hosts (which want to access the IPv4 Internet using DNS64+NAT64, and thus need a DNS64 as their recursive resolver) and dual-stack hosts (which need a 'normal' DNS as their recursive resolver) simultaneously. I just sent email to the authors and chairs with additional detail, and am shortly going to publish an Internet Draft discussing this issue in more detail. Section 3.1 should additionally mention that an end-network IPv4 CPE that incorporates a NAT also incorporates a DHCPv4 server. The inclusion of a DHCP server in the CPE is implied, but should be explicitly stated. The DHCP server in the CPE allows the in-home network to be self-sufficient (for IP addressing, if not naming). This is relevant to IPv6 because, I have been told, ULAs provide a similar "LAN only" address. This should be mentioned or a pointer to how hosts inside the home should use ULAs mentioned. We do not want streaming between an in-home NAS and an in-home television to rely on the WAN link's availability. This is mentioned (insufficiently) in Section 4.2 and some of the L-* requirements. The definition of Service Provider is "a company that ...", which precludes non-companies such as, for example, a University offering service to students in University housing. Is that intentional? Many of the enumerated requirements contain multiple "MUSTs" or "SHOULDs". This makes things complicated, because a vendor (or a customer) cannot say, for example, "we comply with all of RFCxyz, except L-5" because L-5 contains three MUSTs and one SHOULD. Taking L-5 as an example, I suggest changing from: OLD: L-5: The IPv6 CE router MUST assign a separate /64 from its delegated prefix (and ULA prefix if configured to provide ULA addressing) for each of its LAN interfaces. The IPV6 CE router MUST make the interface an advertising interface according to [RFC4861]. In router advertisements messages, the Prefix Information Option's A/L-bits MUST be set to 1 by default; the A/L bits setting SHOULD be user configurable. NEW: L-5: a. The IPv6 CE router MUST assign a separate /64 from its delegated prefix (and ULA prefix if configured to provide ULA addressing) for each of its LAN interfaces. b. The IPV6 CE router MUST make the interface an advertising interface according to [RFC4861]. c. In router advertisements messages, the Prefix Information Option's A/L-bits MUST be set to 1 by default; d. the A/L bits setting SHOULD be user configurable. This would allow a vendor (or a customer) to say "we comply with all of RFCxyz, except L-5c and L5-d". Nits are being sent directly to the authors. -d From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 11:52:27 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A1A328C1A4 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 11:52:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ghzN+XwCZvCw for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 11:52:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5401A28C131 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 11:52:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSFOL-000KGB-Qk for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 19:48:33 +0000 Received: from [209.85.219.219] (helo=mail-ew0-f219.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSFOF-000KFj-HK for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 19:48:27 +0000 Received: by ewy19 with SMTP id 19so8643198ewy.1 for ; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 11:48:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=7TprxmpMjS7GhU9iA88GyV8APs04FLuArC0UGW/imqM=; b=cflMIAZAff1mpbQa4iSAhgycrbUx3wmC4EQpPasztkqtIz0HHIQyeZyQreqNufMiAB u/tEV5rdu1Hwtd5GDi4WokOK24pqdNZYNYu8lWKGsn0ZLFegT+P7r35HONPsTYk79pG8 Jsrmu4INkPT0zX3QWvOG+JyZMIWCLT6RzU+yc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=sAFZyi7pcI58Vdy2qnzrTLBi9ZSDz/wkm7bwyWpA3awL3Ll2xAGeuibFLwV+HsyIV9 3BVrgj74B2kBcVRWQzsIWpTKr7NGkJAjhQMp3g2FUWp6FcuyeShaRMntWUAFvrJzk5E7 jzfGxMyOdkxc22dSoMDs47yXBOj12b2f3qC2o= Received: by 10.216.88.80 with SMTP id z58mr1258214wee.116.1262720906021; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 11:48:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?10.1.1.4? ([121.98.142.15]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j8sm52170110gvb.2.2010.01.05.11.48.20 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 05 Jan 2010 11:48:24 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B43977A.1040706@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2010 08:48:10 +1300 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dan Wing CC: 'Fred Baker' , v6ops@ops.ietf.org, kurtis@kurtis.pp.se, rbonica@juniper.net, draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router@tools.ietf.org Subject: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> <048501ca8e39$65613570$c5f0200a@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <048501ca8e39$65613570$c5f0200a@cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On 2010-01-06 08:00, Dan Wing wrote: ... > Section 3.1 should additionally mention that an end-network > IPv4 CPE that incorporates a NAT also incorporates a DHCPv4 > server. The inclusion of a DHCP server in the CPE is implied, > but should be explicitly stated. The DHCP server in the CPE > allows the in-home network to be self-sufficient (for IP > addressing, if not naming). Sure, for IPv4, you need DHCP, but... > > This is relevant to IPv6 because, I have been told, ULAs > provide a similar "LAN only" address. This should be > mentioned or a pointer to how hosts inside the home should > use ULAs mentioned. We do not want streaming between an > in-home NAS and an in-home television to rely on the > WAN link's availability. This is mentioned (insufficiently) > in Section 4.2 and some of the L-* requirements. I don't understand what you're getting at here. Whether the LAN uses a ULA prefix is orthogonal to whether it uses DHCPv6. It can be set up by RAs and SLAAC (or even manually, but that's unlikely). I think the L-* requirements for ULAs are necessary and sufficient. Despite the problems with RFC3484, I think the provision of a ULA prefix by the CPE will bring about local streaming automatically. That was certainly the intention behind ULAs. Brian From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 12:21:01 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D557F28C131 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 12:21:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -108.199 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-108.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.600, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Yl3p4AsB31xb for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 12:21:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1BE03A68DA for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 12:21:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSFp3-000ONb-Px for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:16:09 +0000 Received: from [171.68.10.86] (helo=sj-iport-4.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSFoy-000OMf-0c for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:16:04 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-4.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,224,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="70410460" Received: from sj-core-4.cisco.com ([171.68.223.138]) by sj-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Jan 2010 20:16:03 +0000 Received: from dwingwxp01 ([10.32.240.197]) by sj-core-4.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o05KG3wJ022544; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 20:16:03 GMT From: "Dan Wing" To: "'Brian E Carpenter'" Cc: "'Fred Baker'" , , , , References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> <048501ca8e39$65613570$c5f0200a@cisco.com> <4B43977A.1040706@gmail.com> Subject: RE: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 12:16:03 -0800 Message-ID: <053201ca8e43$e7b19b50$c5f0200a@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <4B43977A.1040706@gmail.com> Thread-Index: AcqOQAxdzfo042NeR8e9UIy7Z+RTDAAAsRMw X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 11:48 AM > To: Dan Wing > Cc: 'Fred Baker'; v6ops@ops.ietf.org; kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; > rbonica@juniper.net; draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router@tools.ietf.org > Subject: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] > > On 2010-01-06 08:00, Dan Wing wrote: > ... > > Section 3.1 should additionally mention that an end-network > > IPv4 CPE that incorporates a NAT also incorporates a DHCPv4 > > server. The inclusion of a DHCP server in the CPE is implied, > > but should be explicitly stated. The DHCP server in the CPE > > allows the in-home network to be self-sufficient (for IP > > addressing, if not naming). > > Sure, for IPv4, you need DHCP, but... > > > > > This is relevant to IPv6 because, I have been told, ULAs > > provide a similar "LAN only" address. This should be > > mentioned or a pointer to how hosts inside the home should > > use ULAs mentioned. We do not want streaming between an > > in-home NAS and an in-home television to rely on the > > WAN link's availability. This is mentioned (insufficiently) > > in Section 4.2 and some of the L-* requirements. > > I don't understand what you're getting at here. Whether the > LAN uses a ULA prefix is orthogonal to whether it uses > DHCPv6. Agreed; but I didn't say DHCPv6 was needed to assign ULAs (you did). > It can be set up by RAs and SLAAC (or even manually, > but that's unlikely). > > I think the L-* requirements for ULAs are necessary and sufficient. I agree the L-* requirements for ULAs are sufficient. I am asking for more explanatory text about the value and purpose of ULAs (or a pointer to such explanatory text), in Section 3.2 "IPv6 end-user network architecture", because Section 3.2's only mention of ULA is that the CE Router is a "ULA boundary". We're in WGLC, so my suggested text for Section 3.2 is along the lines of something like this: Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses (ULA) [RFC4193] are used by hosts communicating within the End-user Network; this is functionally similar to RFC1918 addresses used within an IPv4 End-user Network. and place that sentence immediately prior to the sentence in Section 3.2 starting with "The IPv6 CE router defaults to acting as the demarcation point ...". > Despite the problems with RFC3484, I think the provision of a ULA > prefix by the CPE will bring about local streaming automatically. > That was certainly the intention behind ULAs. I'm asking for text to provide motivation for the existing L-1 requirement (which reads "The IPv6 CE router MUST support ULA addressing [RFC4193]"). -d From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 13:22:45 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A206E3A67F2 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 13:22:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lIs5pc0um5+G for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 13:22:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD5343A6767 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 13:22:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSGkT-0005Db-4d for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 21:15:29 +0000 Received: from [209.85.211.191] (helo=mail-yw0-f191.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSGkM-0005Cu-1j for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 21:15:22 +0000 Received: by ywh29 with SMTP id 29so20196977ywh.32 for ; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 13:15:21 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=x2mJAOM+Lbf/v4+V/mnAJVZvQbulMkRSh7GIGz41ApE=; b=jJy1l3bwiMTL/Ub4Vo1h+8JRZU+/8WoCYNigU2pvKj8GK5x8ZPFvV9TfT6diFxQvxO 6ETYke9cZ7i/fcd/XY2mb3dNDVYE4itUhbHiRyKynxhVW5kI6603m1OynTc0zFLPyNFz EWXOmS40JcLuhs35XOjLJgg4uUh+rEBpbIEsQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=bacYXuh+xX2MzgVVCpgjP0AGVjJf5OxsAjXVmGsLIvlQO7/mvLELg3Ti9+W6FJ8EvX mXwop3s9pwMgaO+2xuYqP6x4frEpm54Tzv/Re2kbZcOiJOea6HvOfcu61iZP52CvC4KC daa5zKhqSEtuyfMNJZ6nWBBGXCSKI/OvMGQcs= Received: by 10.150.250.1 with SMTP id x1mr23255407ybh.86.1262726121138; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 13:15:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?10.1.1.4? ([121.98.142.15]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 4sm6814225ywg.58.2010.01.05.13.15.17 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 05 Jan 2010 13:15:20 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B43ABDE.8060404@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2010 10:15:10 +1300 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dan Wing CC: 'Fred Baker' , v6ops@ops.ietf.org, kurtis@kurtis.pp.se, rbonica@juniper.net, draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> <048501ca8e39$65613570$c5f0200a@cisco.com> <4B43977A.1040706@gmail.com> <053201ca8e43$e7b19b50$c5f0200a@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <053201ca8e43$e7b19b50$c5f0200a@cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Dan, I'm fine with your suggested text. Regards Brian On 2010-01-06 09:16, Dan Wing wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 11:48 AM >> To: Dan Wing >> Cc: 'Fred Baker'; v6ops@ops.ietf.org; kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; >> rbonica@juniper.net; draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router@tools.ietf.org >> Subject: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] >> >> On 2010-01-06 08:00, Dan Wing wrote: >> ... >>> Section 3.1 should additionally mention that an end-network >>> IPv4 CPE that incorporates a NAT also incorporates a DHCPv4 >>> server. The inclusion of a DHCP server in the CPE is implied, >>> but should be explicitly stated. The DHCP server in the CPE >>> allows the in-home network to be self-sufficient (for IP >>> addressing, if not naming). >> Sure, for IPv4, you need DHCP, but... >> >>> This is relevant to IPv6 because, I have been told, ULAs >>> provide a similar "LAN only" address. This should be >>> mentioned or a pointer to how hosts inside the home should >>> use ULAs mentioned. We do not want streaming between an >>> in-home NAS and an in-home television to rely on the >>> WAN link's availability. This is mentioned (insufficiently) >>> in Section 4.2 and some of the L-* requirements. >> I don't understand what you're getting at here. Whether the >> LAN uses a ULA prefix is orthogonal to whether it uses >> DHCPv6. > > Agreed; but I didn't say DHCPv6 was needed to assign ULAs (you did). > >> It can be set up by RAs and SLAAC (or even manually, >> but that's unlikely). >> >> I think the L-* requirements for ULAs are necessary and sufficient. > > I agree the L-* requirements for ULAs are sufficient. > > I am asking for more explanatory text about the value and purpose > of ULAs (or a pointer to such explanatory text), in Section 3.2 > "IPv6 end-user network architecture", because Section 3.2's only > mention of ULA is that the CE Router is a "ULA boundary". > > We're in WGLC, so my suggested text for Section 3.2 is along > the lines of something like this: > > Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses (ULA) [RFC4193] are used > by hosts communicating within the End-user Network; this is > functionally similar to RFC1918 addresses used within an > IPv4 End-user Network. > > and place that sentence immediately prior to the sentence in Section > 3.2 starting with "The IPv6 CE router defaults to acting as > the demarcation point ...". > >> Despite the problems with RFC3484, I think the provision of a ULA >> prefix by the CPE will bring about local streaming automatically. >> That was certainly the intention behind ULAs. > > I'm asking for text to provide motivation for the existing L-1 > requirement (which reads "The IPv6 CE router MUST support ULA > addressing [RFC4193]"). > > -d > > From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 13:42:39 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37F3428C106 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 13:42:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TPPDckSAbO1V for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 13:42:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BF6D3A6909 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 13:42:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSHA2-0007cn-PA for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 21:41:54 +0000 Received: from [171.68.10.87] (helo=sj-iport-5.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSH9w-0007cD-CR for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 21:41:48 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-5.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAEJAQ0urRN+J/2dsb2JhbAC/P5RPhDAE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,224,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="128810467" Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.223.137]) by sj-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Jan 2010 21:41:47 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com [72.163.62.138]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o05LflQ5003679; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 21:41:47 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-114.cisco.com ([72.163.62.156]) by xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 5 Jan 2010 15:41:47 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 15:41:45 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] Thread-Index: AcqOQAxdzfo042NeR8e9UIy7Z+RTDAAAsRMwAAJnOdAAANLGoA== References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> <048501ca8e39$65613570$c5f0200a@cisco.com> <4B43977A.1040706@gmail.com> <053201ca8e43$e7b19b50$c5f0200a@cisco.com> From: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" To: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" , "Dan Wing (dwing)" , "Brian E Carpenter" Cc: "Fred Baker (fred)" , , , , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Jan 2010 21:41:47.0581 (UTC) FILETIME=[E1D406D0:01CA8E4F] Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Dan, Sorry, in my reply, I missed seeing that you had already suggested text as motivation for use of ULA. Your text looks OK to me. Thanks much. Hemant From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 13:47:06 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 978AF28C140 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 13:47:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 196vv4mWTcur for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 13:47:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B209428C0EA for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 13:47:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSH7D-0007LR-Eq for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 21:38:59 +0000 Received: from [171.68.10.87] (helo=sj-iport-5.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSH77-0007JT-MJ for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 21:38:53 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-5.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAEJAQ0urRN+K/2dsb2JhbAC/P5RPhDAE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,224,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="128808340" Received: from sj-core-4.cisco.com ([171.68.223.138]) by sj-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Jan 2010 21:38:53 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com [72.163.62.138]) by sj-core-4.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o05Lcq1J024920; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 21:38:52 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-114.cisco.com ([72.163.62.156]) by xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 5 Jan 2010 15:38:52 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 15:37:52 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <053201ca8e43$e7b19b50$c5f0200a@cisco.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] Thread-Index: AcqOQAxdzfo042NeR8e9UIy7Z+RTDAAAsRMwAAJnOdA= References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> <048501ca8e39$65613570$c5f0200a@cisco.com> <4B43977A.1040706@gmail.com> <053201ca8e43$e7b19b50$c5f0200a@cisco.com> From: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" To: "Dan Wing (dwing)" , "Brian E Carpenter" Cc: "Fred Baker (fred)" , , , , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Jan 2010 21:38:52.0700 (UTC) FILETIME=[79974DC0:01CA8E4F] Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: >-----Original Message----- >From: Dan Wing (dwing)=20 >Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 3:16 PM >To: 'Brian E Carpenter' >Cc: Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops.ietf.org; kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net; draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router@tools.ietf.org >Subject: RE: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] >I'm asking for text to provide motivation for the existing L-1=20 >requirement (which reads "The IPv6 CE router MUST support ULA=20 >addressing [RFC4193]"). About two years back Brian Carpenter gave the dentist's office as one motivation for use of ULA in the home with the CE Rtr. The dentist's office network is setup once and that's how it runs for a long time. If the Internet WAN link of the dentist's office CE Rtr goes down, the dentist can still print from his office PC to his printer which are both using ULA. The other motivation that is also in emails of v6ops archives is that what does one do for configuration of the CE Rtr right out of shrink-wrap? The user bought the device from retail and powered it up in the home before attaching the CE Router to any WAN. Without a GUA (Globally Unique Address), how does one configure the CE Rtr if using link-local is spotty at best to access a device with a link-local URL. You see, the link-local can be common to all LAN ports of the CE Rtr and that is why it's not a good address to use to configure the CE Rtr in a web browser. So that leaves only the GUA (auto-configured on the CE Rtr on power up) to configure the device with using a web browser. Auto-configuration of the CE Rtr is part of the Phase II document, so any more details in the current CE Rtr doc (Phase I) will be skipped. If none objects that motivation for use of ULA needs to be included as text in the CE Rtr doc, what we can do is work on a formal version of what I have summarized above. Further, in an earlier version of the CE Rtr we also said the ULA and the GUA coexist on a LAN network interface. Since the addresses coexist, here is what our earlier version said about RFC 3484. =20 "... every LAN interface has a link-local unicast address, a ULA, and a GUA. Therefore, the interface has to apply source address selection to determine which address to use as a source for outgoing packets. Since the GUA and ULA have a larger scope than the link-local address (rule #2 of [RFC3484]), the GUA or ULA will be used as a source address of outgoing packets that are not subject to rule #1. For source address selection between a GUA and ULA, rule #8 of [RFC3484] will be used." In the -03 version we have removed such text. Thanks, Hemant From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 14:10:37 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C758D3A6889 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:10:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -107.728 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-107.728 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.729, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9EC0uM5oz52D for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:10:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF0A13A6868 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:10:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSHau-000APq-Rv for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:09:40 +0000 Received: from [171.68.10.86] (helo=sj-iport-4.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSHap-000APM-0G for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:09:35 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-4.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,224,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="70464602" Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.223.137]) by sj-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Jan 2010 22:09:34 +0000 Received: from dwingwxp01 ([10.32.240.197]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o05M9Yrg027124; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 22:09:34 GMT From: "Dan Wing" To: "'Mark Smith'" , "'Hemant Singh \(shemant\)'" Cc: "'Brian E Carpenter'" , "'Fred Baker \(fred\)'" , , , , References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com><048501ca8e39$65613570$c5f0200a@cisco.com><4B43977A.1040706@gmail.com><053201ca8e43$e7b19b50$c5f0200a@cisco.com> <20100106083617.1f1ae7ab@opy.nosense.org> Subject: RE: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:09:34 -0800 Message-ID: <060601ca8e53$c38ae550$c5f0200a@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <20100106083617.1f1ae7ab@opy.nosense.org> Thread-Index: AcqOU15cJ3rsep30Qi26cNwxBJzXqwAAE4xg X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Smith > [mailto:ipng@69706e6720323030352d30312d31340a.nosense.org] > Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 2:06 PM > To: Hemant Singh (shemant) > Cc: Dan Wing (dwing); Brian E Carpenter; Fred Baker (fred); > v6ops@ops.ietf.org; kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net; > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router@tools.ietf.org > Subject: Re: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] > > On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 15:37:52 -0600 > "Hemant Singh (shemant)" wrote: > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > >From: Dan Wing (dwing) > > >Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 3:16 PM > > >To: 'Brian E Carpenter' > > >Cc: Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops.ietf.org; kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; > > rbonica@juniper.net; draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router@tools.ietf.org > > >Subject: RE: ULAs [Re: > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] > > > > >I'm asking for text to provide motivation for the existing L-1 > > >requirement (which reads "The IPv6 CE router MUST support ULA > > >addressing [RFC4193]"). > > > > About two years back Brian Carpenter gave the dentist's > office as one > > motivation for use of ULA in the home with the CE Rtr. The dentist's > > office network is setup once and that's how it runs for a > long time. If > > the Internet WAN link of the dentist's office CE Rtr goes down, the > > dentist can still print from his office PC to his printer > which are both > > using ULA. The other motivation that is also in emails of v6ops > > archives is that what does one do for configuration of the > CE Rtr right > > out of shrink-wrap? The user bought the device from retail > and powered > > it up in the home before attaching the CE Router to any > WAN. Without a > > GUA (Globally Unique Address), how does one configure the CE Rtr if > > using link-local is spotty at best to access a device with > a link-local > > URL. You see, the link-local can be common to all LAN > ports of the CE > > Rtr and that is why it's not a good address to use to > configure the CE > > Rtr in a web browser. So that leaves only the GUA > (auto-configured on > > the CE Rtr on power up) to configure the device with using a web > > browser. Auto-configuration of the CE Rtr is part of the Phase II > > document, so any more details in the current CE Rtr doc > (Phase I) will > > be skipped. > > Somewhat related, is there room in this ID for adding > Zerconf/multicast > DNS etc. for the convenience of browsing or device name based > discovery > to be able to configure the device via a web/ software application > interface? ULAs are great for this purpose, but end-users should never > have to work out what they are type them into anywhere, and I think > there should be a standard mechanism to discover CPE configuration > interfaces. Or is it out of scope? The hosts (and users on the hosts) might care, but the CE router doesn't need to be involved in mDNS, does it? Feels out of scope to me, for whatever that's worth. -d > Regards, > Mark. > > > > > If none objects that motivation for use of ULA needs to be > included as > > text in the CE Rtr doc, what we can do is work on a formal > version of > > what I have summarized above. > > > > Further, in an earlier version of the CE Rtr we also said > the ULA and > > the GUA coexist on a LAN network interface. Since the addresses > > coexist, here is what our earlier version said about RFC 3484. > > > > "... every LAN interface has a link-local unicast address, > a ULA, and a > > GUA. Therefore, the interface has to apply source address > selection to > > determine which address to use as a source for outgoing > packets. Since > > the GUA and ULA have a larger scope than the link-local > address (rule #2 > > of [RFC3484]), the GUA or ULA will be used as a source address of > > outgoing packets that are not subject to rule #1. For > source address > > selection between a GUA and ULA, rule #8 of [RFC3484] will be used." > > > > In the -03 version we have removed such text. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Hemant > > From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 14:12:33 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFEED3A6868 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:12:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dTWF-A-+Wd+t for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:12:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B78C63A6826 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:12:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSHY4-000ABV-Ey for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:06:44 +0000 Received: from [202.136.110.247] (helo=smtp4.adam.net.au) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSHXx-000AAj-Py for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:06:38 +0000 Received: from 115-166-22-49.ip.adam.com.au ([115.166.22.49] helo=opy.nosense.org) by smtp4.adam.net.au with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1NSHXe-0007G5-Hk; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 08:36:18 +1030 Received: from opy.nosense.org (localhost.localdomain [IPv6:::1]) by opy.nosense.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28F5E492FE; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 08:36:17 +1030 (CST) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 08:36:17 +1030 From: Mark Smith To: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" Cc: "Dan Wing (dwing)" , "Brian E Carpenter" , "Fred Baker (fred)" , , , , Subject: Re: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] Message-ID: <20100106083617.1f1ae7ab@opy.nosense.org> In-Reply-To: References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> <048501ca8e39$65613570$c5f0200a@cisco.com> <4B43977A.1040706@gmail.com> <053201ca8e43$e7b19b50$c5f0200a@cisco.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.3 (GTK+ 2.18.5; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-Location: Lower Mitcham, South Australia, 5062 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 15:37:52 -0600 "Hemant Singh (shemant)" wrote: > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Dan Wing (dwing) > >Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 3:16 PM > >To: 'Brian E Carpenter' > >Cc: Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops.ietf.org; kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; > rbonica@juniper.net; draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router@tools.ietf.org > >Subject: RE: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] > > >I'm asking for text to provide motivation for the existing L-1 > >requirement (which reads "The IPv6 CE router MUST support ULA > >addressing [RFC4193]"). > > About two years back Brian Carpenter gave the dentist's office as one > motivation for use of ULA in the home with the CE Rtr. The dentist's > office network is setup once and that's how it runs for a long time. If > the Internet WAN link of the dentist's office CE Rtr goes down, the > dentist can still print from his office PC to his printer which are both > using ULA. The other motivation that is also in emails of v6ops > archives is that what does one do for configuration of the CE Rtr right > out of shrink-wrap? The user bought the device from retail and powered > it up in the home before attaching the CE Router to any WAN. Without a > GUA (Globally Unique Address), how does one configure the CE Rtr if > using link-local is spotty at best to access a device with a link-local > URL. You see, the link-local can be common to all LAN ports of the CE > Rtr and that is why it's not a good address to use to configure the CE > Rtr in a web browser. So that leaves only the GUA (auto-configured on > the CE Rtr on power up) to configure the device with using a web > browser. Auto-configuration of the CE Rtr is part of the Phase II > document, so any more details in the current CE Rtr doc (Phase I) will > be skipped. Somewhat related, is there room in this ID for adding Zerconf/multicast DNS etc. for the convenience of browsing or device name based discovery to be able to configure the device via a web/ software application interface? ULAs are great for this purpose, but end-users should never have to work out what they are type them into anywhere, and I think there should be a standard mechanism to discover CPE configuration interfaces. Or is it out of scope? Regards, Mark. > > If none objects that motivation for use of ULA needs to be included as > text in the CE Rtr doc, what we can do is work on a formal version of > what I have summarized above. > > Further, in an earlier version of the CE Rtr we also said the ULA and > the GUA coexist on a LAN network interface. Since the addresses > coexist, here is what our earlier version said about RFC 3484. > > "... every LAN interface has a link-local unicast address, a ULA, and a > GUA. Therefore, the interface has to apply source address selection to > determine which address to use as a source for outgoing packets. Since > the GUA and ULA have a larger scope than the link-local address (rule #2 > of [RFC3484]), the GUA or ULA will be used as a source address of > outgoing packets that are not subject to rule #1. For source address > selection between a GUA and ULA, rule #8 of [RFC3484] will be used." > > In the -03 version we have removed such text. > > Thanks, > > Hemant > From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 14:15:28 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3BB43A67D4 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:15:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.499 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uZUpDOtCfQhM for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:15:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61AEB3A6768 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:15:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSHd3-000AfB-Oy for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:11:53 +0000 Received: from [171.68.10.86] (helo=sj-iport-4.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSHcx-000AeE-Em for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:11:47 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-4.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAIdHQ0urRN+K/2dsb2JhbAC/SJRZhDAE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,224,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="70465425" Received: from sj-core-4.cisco.com ([171.68.223.138]) by sj-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Jan 2010 22:11:46 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com [72.163.62.200]) by sj-core-4.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o05MBkZm022947; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 22:11:46 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-114.cisco.com ([72.163.62.156]) by xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 5 Jan 2010 16:11:46 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 16:11:46 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Index: AcqNWC7D0NSBCdUKTgCgAaETCoD48wAQ+GfgAAtQ+EAAFkkNcAAD5w6Q References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> From: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" To: "Templin, Fred L" , "Fred Baker (fred)" , Cc: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Jan 2010 22:11:46.0618 (UTC) FILETIME=[122349A0:01CA8E54] Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: >-----Original Message----- >From: Templin, Fred L [mailto:Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com]=20 >Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 12:00 PM >The IsRouter discussion was on this list (v6ops); not >the 6man list. Maybe you were talking about a different >discussion on the 6man list? No. I am talking about "Stub Router Advertisements in IPv6 NeighborDiscovery" that was being discussed in the 6man mailer between you, Bob Hinden and Thomas Narten. One example of your IsRouter discussion is an email with following date, time, etc. to the 6man list of ipv6@ietf.org. "Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 11:37 AM" >The final sentence of Appendix D also says: > "In these cases, a subsequent Neighbor > Advertisement or Router Advertisement message will set > the correct IsRouter value." >but if the CPE will not send any RA messages over its >WAN interface then the NA is the only other option for >setting the correct IsRouter value. Yes, the CE Rtr is not expected to send any RA over its WAN interface upstream to the SP. So what's the concern if the SP router upstream of the CE Rtr has an incorrect IsRouter value temporarily? When the CE Rtr is a requesting router for delegated prefix, the SP router knows the CE Rtr is a router. Note the CE Rtr is both a host and a router. >If a provider router garbage-collects a FIB entry because >it sees that IsRouter in the nexthop nbr cache entry is >FALSE, the FIB entry is gone and there is no route to the >CE router's prefixes. That is what I am meaning to say >regarding interoperability issues and circumstances. >First, the delegating router need not be co-resident on >the provider router that sends RA to the CE router; it >could be behind a chain of relays instead. Second, just >because the delegating router (and I guess also any >relays in the chain) come to know that the CE router is >a requesting router does not necessarily mean that the >provider router will know enough to reach into its kernel >and set the IsRouter flag in the nbr cache entry to TRUE. >Or, maybe that behavior is specified somewhere that I >didn't see? The FIB does NOT include the Neighbor cache, so why are you discussing "nbr cache entry"? Further, since DHCPv6 (used for requesting a delegated prefix) travels over a link-local address, the CE Rtr will see only the SP router that is in the CE Rtr link-local domain. Therefore any discussion of relay and chains is moot. Sorry, I still don't see a clear problem definition from you. Hemant From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 14:44:12 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53BBD3A681A for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:44:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9nn+r4GINI3o for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:44:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA5BE3A6826 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:44:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSI4l-000Dr9-Sh for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:40:31 +0000 Received: from [202.136.110.251] (helo=smtp2.adam.net.au) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSI4f-000DqQ-A9 for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:40:25 +0000 Received: from 115-166-22-49.ip.adam.com.au ([115.166.22.49] helo=opy.nosense.org) by smtp2.adam.net.au with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1NSI4T-0006BF-P3; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 09:10:13 +1030 Received: from opy.nosense.org (localhost.localdomain [IPv6:::1]) by opy.nosense.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36F7D492FE; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:10:13 +1030 (CST) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:10:13 +1030 From: Mark Smith To: "Dan Wing" Cc: "'Hemant Singh \(shemant\)'" , "'Brian E Carpenter'" , "'Fred Baker \(fred\)'" , , , , Subject: Re: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] Message-ID: <20100106091013.769d3cc5@opy.nosense.org> In-Reply-To: <060601ca8e53$c38ae550$c5f0200a@cisco.com> References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> <048501ca8e39$65613570$c5f0200a@cisco.com> <4B43977A.1040706@gmail.com> <053201ca8e43$e7b19b50$c5f0200a@cisco.com> <20100106083617.1f1ae7ab@opy.nosense.org> <060601ca8e53$c38ae550$c5f0200a@cisco.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.3 (GTK+ 2.18.5; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-Location: Lower Mitcham, South Australia, 5062 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hi Dan, On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:09:34 -0800 "Dan Wing" wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mark Smith > > [mailto:ipng@69706e6720323030352d30312d31340a.nosense.org] > > Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 2:06 PM > > To: Hemant Singh (shemant) > > Cc: Dan Wing (dwing); Brian E Carpenter; Fred Baker (fred); > > v6ops@ops.ietf.org; kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net; > > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router@tools.ietf.org > > Subject: Re: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] > > > > On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 15:37:52 -0600 > > "Hemant Singh (shemant)" wrote: > > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > > >From: Dan Wing (dwing) > > > >Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 3:16 PM > > > >To: 'Brian E Carpenter' > > > >Cc: Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops.ietf.org; kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; > > > rbonica@juniper.net; draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router@tools.ietf.org > > > >Subject: RE: ULAs [Re: > > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] > > > > > > >I'm asking for text to provide motivation for the existing L-1 > > > >requirement (which reads "The IPv6 CE router MUST support ULA > > > >addressing [RFC4193]"). > > > > > > About two years back Brian Carpenter gave the dentist's > > office as one > > > motivation for use of ULA in the home with the CE Rtr. The dentist's > > > office network is setup once and that's how it runs for a > > long time. If > > > the Internet WAN link of the dentist's office CE Rtr goes down, the > > > dentist can still print from his office PC to his printer > > which are both > > > using ULA. The other motivation that is also in emails of v6ops > > > archives is that what does one do for configuration of the > > CE Rtr right > > > out of shrink-wrap? The user bought the device from retail > > and powered > > > it up in the home before attaching the CE Router to any > > WAN. Without a > > > GUA (Globally Unique Address), how does one configure the CE Rtr if > > > using link-local is spotty at best to access a device with > > a link-local > > > URL. You see, the link-local can be common to all LAN > > ports of the CE > > > Rtr and that is why it's not a good address to use to > > configure the CE > > > Rtr in a web browser. So that leaves only the GUA > > (auto-configured on > > > the CE Rtr on power up) to configure the device with using a web > > > browser. Auto-configuration of the CE Rtr is part of the Phase II > > > document, so any more details in the current CE Rtr doc > > (Phase I) will > > > be skipped. > > > > Somewhat related, is there room in this ID for adding > > Zerconf/multicast > > DNS etc. for the convenience of browsing or device name based > > discovery > > to be able to configure the device via a web/ software application > > interface? ULAs are great for this purpose, but end-users should never > > have to work out what they are type them into anywhere, and I think > > there should be a standard mechanism to discover CPE configuration > > interfaces. Or is it out of scope? > > The hosts (and users on the hosts) might care, but the CE router > doesn't need to be involved in mDNS, does it? Feels out of scope > to me, for whatever that's worth. > With residential IPv4 CPE, it's easy enough for customers to type in e.g. 192.168.1.1 off of a supplied piece of paper in the box to get to the CPEs configuration interface to type in authentication details etc., and easy enough for helpdesk staff to get customers to type in over the phone for service troubleshooting (in the context of customer owned and chosen CPE, which is the case here in .au). Different CPE do use different RFC1918 addresses, however the set of them is fairly small, and they're usually all within the 192.168/16 range. Sometimes it's printed on the label on the bottom of the device. Having an end-user accurately type in an equivalent IPv6 address, even a common one, is going to be hard, and with ULAs being customer specific, a lot of time would be spent just working with the customer to determine what the ULA of their CPE is, to then access the web interface. Some vendors get around these issues by supplying setup software that performs the device discovery. While that's a user friendly solution, for a helpdesk, the ubiquity of a web browser and web interface on the CPE is a useful and reliable minimum. I suppose these issues could be out of scope for this draft, if it is focused only on the IPv6 functions the CPE has to support, rather than issues like configuration interfaces etc. mDNS possibly falls across the boundary between in and out of scope - useful if it's a fundamental feature of all IPv6 CPE (in scope), but only really there to facilitate CPE configuration (out of scope). Regards, Mark. > -d > > > > Regards, > > Mark. > > > > > > > > If none objects that motivation for use of ULA needs to be > > included as > > > text in the CE Rtr doc, what we can do is work on a formal > > version of > > > what I have summarized above. > > > > > > Further, in an earlier version of the CE Rtr we also said > > the ULA and > > > the GUA coexist on a LAN network interface. Since the addresses > > > coexist, here is what our earlier version said about RFC 3484. > > > > > > "... every LAN interface has a link-local unicast address, > > a ULA, and a > > > GUA. Therefore, the interface has to apply source address > > selection to > > > determine which address to use as a source for outgoing > > packets. Since > > > the GUA and ULA have a larger scope than the link-local > > address (rule #2 > > > of [RFC3484]), the GUA or ULA will be used as a source address of > > > outgoing packets that are not subject to rule #1. For > > source address > > > selection between a GUA and ULA, rule #8 of [RFC3484] will be used." > > > > > > In the -03 version we have removed such text. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Hemant > > > > From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 14:49:05 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C2AD3A659C for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:49:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.392 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.392 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.207, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sDFOWQfb61mW for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:49:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 258413A681A for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:49:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSIAh-000EVX-Qr for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:46:39 +0000 Received: from [130.76.32.69] (helo=blv-smtpout-01.boeing.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSIAb-000EV5-MF for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:46:33 +0000 Received: from stl-av-01.boeing.com (stl-av-01.boeing.com [192.76.190.6]) by blv-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/8.14.0/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id o05MkJSx023083 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:46:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from stl-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by stl-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o05MkICe021029; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 16:46:18 -0600 (CST) Received: from XCH-NWHT-09.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwht-09.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.25.115]) by stl-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o05MkIwF020998 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Tue, 5 Jan 2010 16:46:18 -0600 (CST) Received: from XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.64.97]) by XCH-NWHT-09.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.25.115]) with mapi; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:46:17 -0800 From: "Templin, Fred L" To: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" , "Fred Baker (fred)" , "v6ops@ops.ietf.org" CC: "kurtis@kurtis.pp.se" , "rbonica@juniper.net" Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:46:16 -0800 Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Topic: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Index: AcqNWC7D0NSBCdUKTgCgAaETCoD48wAQ+GfgAAtQ+EAAFkkNcAAD5w6QAAjVHBA= Message-ID: References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hemant, > -----Original Message----- > From: Hemant Singh (shemant) [mailto:shemant@cisco.com] > Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 2:12 PM > To: Templin, Fred L; Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops.ietf.org > Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net > Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ie= tf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router- > 03.txt WGLC) >=20 >=20 >=20 > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Templin, Fred L [mailto:Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com] > >Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 12:00 PM >=20 > >The IsRouter discussion was on this list (v6ops); not > >the 6man list. Maybe you were talking about a different > >discussion on the 6man list? >=20 > No. I am talking about "Stub Router Advertisements in IPv6 > NeighborDiscovery" that was being discussed in the 6man mailer between > you, Bob Hinden and Thomas Narten. One example of your IsRouter > discussion is an email with following date, time, etc. to the 6man list > of ipv6@ietf.org. > > "Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 11:37 AM" > > > >The final sentence of Appendix D also says: >=20 > > "In these cases, a subsequent Neighbor > > Advertisement or Router Advertisement message will set > > the correct IsRouter value." >=20 > >but if the CPE will not send any RA messages over its > >WAN interface then the NA is the only other option for > >setting the correct IsRouter value. >=20 > Yes, the CE Rtr is not expected to send any RA over its WAN interface > upstream to the SP. So what's the concern if the SP router upstream of > the CE Rtr has an incorrect IsRouter value temporarily? When the CE Rtr > is a requesting router for delegated prefix, the SP router knows the CE > Rtr is a router. Note the CE Rtr is both a host and a router. Does the SP router know enough to update the neighbor cache entry for a CE router and and change IsRouter from FALSE to TRUE based only on the act of delegating a prefix? Where is that behavior specified? > >If a provider router garbage-collects a FIB entry because > >it sees that IsRouter in the nexthop nbr cache entry is > >FALSE, the FIB entry is gone and there is no route to the > >CE router's prefixes. That is what I am meaning to say > >regarding interoperability issues and circumstances. > >First, the delegating router need not be co-resident on > >the provider router that sends RA to the CE router; it > >could be behind a chain of relays instead. Second, just > >because the delegating router (and I guess also any > >relays in the chain) come to know that the CE router is > >a requesting router does not necessarily mean that the > >provider router will know enough to reach into its kernel > >and set the IsRouter flag in the nbr cache entry to TRUE. > >Or, maybe that behavior is specified somewhere that I > >didn't see? >=20 > The FIB does NOT include the Neighbor cache, so why are you discussing > "nbr cache entry"? No; the FIB does not include the neighbor cache and that is not what I said. The neighbor cache is a per-interface data structure, and FIB entries maintain a "next_hop" that points to a neighbor cache entry. If a FIB entry garbage-collection algorithm examines the IsRouter flag in the neighbor cache entry to which the FIB entry points, and the flag is FALSE, the FIB entry may be incorrectly purged. > Further, since DHCPv6 (used for requesting a > delegated prefix) travels over a link-local address, the CE Rtr will see > only the SP router that is in the CE Rtr link-local domain. Therefore > any discussion of relay and chains is moot. Sorry, I still don't see a > clear problem definition from you. I don't want to address the DHCP relay point because it is a distraction from the core problem definition, which I provided above. Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com > Hemant From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 14:57:31 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83C353A67CF for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:57:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SgxD8JFwPf+S for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:57:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1534A3A659C for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:57:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSII6-000FED-Eg for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:54:18 +0000 Received: from [171.71.176.70] (helo=sj-iport-1.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSIHz-000FDn-U1 for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:54:12 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,224,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="285201299" Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com ([171.71.177.254]) by sj-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Jan 2010 22:54:10 +0000 Received: from herbst-wxp04.cisco.com ([10.21.74.42]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o05MsA3g027140; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 22:54:10 GMT Message-Id: <201001052254.o05MsA3g027140@sj-core-2.cisco.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2010 14:54:16 -0800 To: "Mark Smith" , "Dan Wing (dwing)" From: Thomas Herbst Subject: Re: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] Cc: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" , "Brian E Carpenter" , "Fred Baker (fred)" , , , , , herbst@cisco.com In-Reply-To: <20100106091013.769d3cc5@opy.nosense.org> References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> <048501ca8e39$65613570$c5f0200a@cisco.com> <4B43977A.1040706@gmail.com> <053201ca8e43$e7b19b50$c5f0200a@cisco.com> <20100106083617.1f1ae7ab@opy.nosense.org> <060601ca8e53$c38ae550$c5f0200a@cisco.com> <20100106091013.769d3cc5@opy.nosense.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: I agree that using mDNS to advertise the location of the web service that could be used to configure the CPE router is a good thing to do, and I have advocated such directly to more than one manufacturer. That said, it is out of scope for this document unless we want to continue down the path of writing a CPE PRD. tom At 02:40 PM 1/5/2010, Mark Smith wrote: >Hi Dan, > >On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:09:34 -0800 >"Dan Wing" wrote: > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Mark Smith > > > > [mailto:ipng@69706e6720323030352d30312d31340a.nosense.org] > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 2:06 PM > > > To: Hemant Singh (shemant) > > > Cc: Dan Wing (dwing); Brian E Carpenter; Fred Baker (fred); > > > v6ops@ops.ietf.org; kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net; > > > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router@tools.ietf.org > > > Subject: Re: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] > > > > > > On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 15:37:52 -0600 > > > "Hemant Singh (shemant)" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > > > >From: Dan Wing (dwing) > > > > >Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 3:16 PM > > > > >To: 'Brian E Carpenter' > > > > >Cc: Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops.ietf.org; kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; > > > > rbonica@juniper.net; draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router@tools.ietf.org > > > > >Subject: RE: ULAs [Re: > > > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] > > > > > > > > >I'm asking for text to provide motivation for the existing L-1 > > > > >requirement (which reads "The IPv6 CE router MUST support ULA > > > > >addressing [RFC4193]"). > > > > > > > > About two years back Brian Carpenter gave the dentist's > > > office as one > > > > motivation for use of ULA in the home with the CE Rtr. The dentist's > > > > office network is setup once and that's how it runs for a > > > long time. If > > > > the Internet WAN link of the dentist's office CE Rtr goes down, the > > > > dentist can still print from his office PC to his printer > > > which are both > > > > using ULA. The other motivation that is also in emails of v6ops > > > > archives is that what does one do for configuration of the > > > CE Rtr right > > > > out of shrink-wrap? The user bought the device from retail > > > and powered > > > > it up in the home before attaching the CE Router to any > > > WAN. Without a > > > > GUA (Globally Unique Address), how does one configure the CE Rtr if > > > > using link-local is spotty at best to access a device with > > > a link-local > > > > URL. You see, the link-local can be common to all LAN > > > ports of the CE > > > > Rtr and that is why it's not a good address to use to > > > configure the CE > > > > Rtr in a web browser. So that leaves only the GUA > > > (auto-configured on > > > > the CE Rtr on power up) to configure the device with using a web > > > > browser. Auto-configuration of the CE Rtr is part of the Phase II > > > > document, so any more details in the current CE Rtr doc > > > (Phase I) will > > > > be skipped. > > > > > > Somewhat related, is there room in this ID for adding > > > Zerconf/multicast > > > DNS etc. for the convenience of browsing or device name based > > > discovery > > > to be able to configure the device via a web/ software application > > > interface? ULAs are great for this purpose, but end-users should never > > > have to work out what they are type them into anywhere, and I think > > > there should be a standard mechanism to discover CPE configuration > > > interfaces. Or is it out of scope? > > > > The hosts (and users on the hosts) might care, but the CE router > > doesn't need to be involved in mDNS, does it? Feels out of scope > > to me, for whatever that's worth. > > > >With residential IPv4 CPE, it's easy enough for customers to type in >e.g. 192.168.1.1 off of a supplied piece of paper in the box to get to >the CPEs configuration interface to type in authentication details >etc., and easy enough for helpdesk staff to get customers to type in >over the phone for service troubleshooting (in the context of customer >owned and chosen CPE, which is the case here in .au). Different CPE do >use different RFC1918 addresses, however the set of them is fairly >small, and they're usually all within the 192.168/16 range. Sometimes >it's printed on the label on the bottom of the device. > >Having an end-user accurately type in an equivalent IPv6 address, even >a common one, is going to be hard, and with ULAs being customer >specific, a lot of time would be spent just working with the customer >to determine what the ULA of their CPE is, to then access the web >interface. > >Some vendors get around these issues by supplying setup software >that performs the device discovery. While that's a user friendly >solution, for a helpdesk, the ubiquity of a web browser and web >interface on the CPE is a useful and reliable minimum. > >I suppose these issues could be out of scope for this draft, if it is >focused only on the IPv6 functions the CPE has to support, rather than >issues like configuration interfaces etc. mDNS possibly falls across >the boundary between in and out of scope - useful if it's a fundamental >feature of all IPv6 CPE (in scope), but only really there to facilitate >CPE configuration (out of scope). > >Regards, >Mark. > > > > > -d > > > > > > > Regards, > > > Mark. > > > > > > > > > > > If none objects that motivation for use of ULA needs to be > > > included as > > > > text in the CE Rtr doc, what we can do is work on a formal > > > version of > > > > what I have summarized above. > > > > > > > > Further, in an earlier version of the CE Rtr we also said > > > the ULA and > > > > the GUA coexist on a LAN network interface. Since the addresses > > > > coexist, here is what our earlier version said about RFC 3484. > > > > > > > > "... every LAN interface has a link-local unicast address, > > > a ULA, and a > > > > GUA. Therefore, the interface has to apply source address > > > selection to > > > > determine which address to use as a source for outgoing > > > packets. Since > > > > the GUA and ULA have a larger scope than the link-local > > > address (rule #2 > > > > of [RFC3484]), the GUA or ULA will be used as a source address of > > > > outgoing packets that are not subject to rule #1. For > > > source address > > > > selection between a GUA and ULA, rule #8 of [RFC3484] will be used." > > > > > > > > In the -03 version we have removed such text. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Hemant > > > > > > From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 15:10:29 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 385843A68D3 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 15:10:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -107.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-107.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.600, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IjjDx+ci6ULq for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 15:10:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E19D3A657C for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 15:10:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSITb-000Gj4-Ee for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 23:06:11 +0000 Received: from [171.68.10.87] (helo=sj-iport-5.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSITU-000Gh8-FV for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 23:06:04 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-5.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,224,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="128851425" Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.223.137]) by sj-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Jan 2010 23:06:04 +0000 Received: from dwingwxp01 ([10.32.240.197]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o05N6370014249; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 23:06:03 GMT From: "Dan Wing" To: "'Mark Smith'" Cc: "'Hemant Singh \(shemant\)'" , "'Brian E Carpenter'" , "'Fred Baker \(fred\)'" , , , , References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com><048501ca8e39$65613570$c5f0200a@cisco.com><4B43977A.1040706@gmail.com><053201ca8e43$e7b19b50$c5f0200a@cisco.com><20100106083617.1f1ae7ab@opy.nosense.org><060601ca8e53$c38ae550$c5f0200a@cisco.com> <20100106091013.769d3cc5@opy.nosense.org> Subject: RE: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 15:06:03 -0800 Message-ID: <067c01ca8e5b$a79b4760$c5f0200a@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <20100106091013.769d3cc5@opy.nosense.org> Thread-Index: AcqOWA9kL6AtZl06QtyDdDBE5W/7/gAAYsQA X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Smith > [mailto:ipng@69706e6720323030352d30312d31340a.nosense.org] > Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 2:40 PM > To: Dan Wing > Cc: 'Hemant Singh (shemant)'; 'Brian E Carpenter'; 'Fred > Baker (fred)'; v6ops@ops.ietf.org; kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; > rbonica@juniper.net; draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router@tools.ietf.org > Subject: Re: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] > > Hi Dan, > > On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 14:09:34 -0800 > "Dan Wing" wrote: > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Mark Smith > > > [mailto:ipng@69706e6720323030352d30312d31340a.nosense.org] > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 2:06 PM > > > To: Hemant Singh (shemant) > > > Cc: Dan Wing (dwing); Brian E Carpenter; Fred Baker (fred); > > > v6ops@ops.ietf.org; kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net; > > > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router@tools.ietf.org > > > Subject: Re: ULAs [Re: > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] > > > > > > On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 15:37:52 -0600 > > > "Hemant Singh (shemant)" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > > > >From: Dan Wing (dwing) > > > > >Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 3:16 PM > > > > >To: 'Brian E Carpenter' > > > > >Cc: Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops.ietf.org; kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; > > > > rbonica@juniper.net; > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router@tools.ietf.org > > > > >Subject: RE: ULAs [Re: > > > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] > > > > > > > > >I'm asking for text to provide motivation for the existing L-1 > > > > >requirement (which reads "The IPv6 CE router MUST support ULA > > > > >addressing [RFC4193]"). > > > > > > > > About two years back Brian Carpenter gave the dentist's > > > office as one > > > > motivation for use of ULA in the home with the CE Rtr. > The dentist's > > > > office network is setup once and that's how it runs for a > > > long time. If > > > > the Internet WAN link of the dentist's office CE Rtr > goes down, the > > > > dentist can still print from his office PC to his printer > > > which are both > > > > using ULA. The other motivation that is also in emails of v6ops > > > > archives is that what does one do for configuration of the > > > CE Rtr right > > > > out of shrink-wrap? The user bought the device from retail > > > and powered > > > > it up in the home before attaching the CE Router to any > > > WAN. Without a > > > > GUA (Globally Unique Address), how does one configure > the CE Rtr if > > > > using link-local is spotty at best to access a device with > > > a link-local > > > > URL. You see, the link-local can be common to all LAN > > > ports of the CE > > > > Rtr and that is why it's not a good address to use to > > > configure the CE > > > > Rtr in a web browser. So that leaves only the GUA > > > (auto-configured on > > > > the CE Rtr on power up) to configure the device with using a web > > > > browser. Auto-configuration of the CE Rtr is part of > the Phase II > > > > document, so any more details in the current CE Rtr doc > > > (Phase I) will > > > > be skipped. > > > > > > Somewhat related, is there room in this ID for adding > > > Zerconf/multicast > > > DNS etc. for the convenience of browsing or device name based > > > discovery > > > to be able to configure the device via a web/ software application > > > interface? ULAs are great for this purpose, but end-users > should never > > > have to work out what they are type them into anywhere, > and I think > > > there should be a standard mechanism to discover CPE configuration > > > interfaces. Or is it out of scope? > > > > The hosts (and users on the hosts) might care, but the CE router > > doesn't need to be involved in mDNS, does it? Feels out of scope > > to me, for whatever that's worth. > > > > With residential IPv4 CPE, it's easy enough for customers to type in > e.g. 192.168.1.1 off of a supplied piece of paper in the box to get to > the CPEs configuration interface to type in authentication details > etc., and easy enough for helpdesk staff to get customers to type in > over the phone for service troubleshooting (in the context of customer > owned and chosen CPE, which is the case here in .au). Different CPE do > use different RFC1918 addresses, however the set of them is fairly > small, and they're usually all within the 192.168/16 range. Sometimes > it's printed on the label on the bottom of the device. > > Having an end-user accurately type in an equivalent IPv6 address, even > a common one, is going to be hard, Agreed. Made worse because the HTTP syntax needs "[]" around an IPv6 address literal. > and with ULAs being customer > specific, a lot of time would be spent just working with the customer > to determine what the ULA of their CPE is, to then access the web > interface. Some IPv4 CPE solve that problem by hijacking DNS queries (and sending, as the response, the NAT's internal IP address) or by intercepting outbound TCP/80 and re-routing it to the NAT's HTTP server. Once the IPv4 CPE is happily configured, it steps out of the way and quits interfering. I can see everyone shaking their heads, because IETF would not sanction doing such nasty things. (However, this is why configuring IP is considered 'hard', but I digress.) mDNS would be better than the existing techniques. > Some vendors get around these issues by supplying setup software > that performs the device discovery. While that's a user friendly > solution, for a helpdesk, the ubiquity of a web browser and web > interface on the CPE is a useful and reliable minimum. > > I suppose these issues could be out of scope for this draft, if it is > focused only on the IPv6 functions the CPE has to support, rather than > issues like configuration interfaces etc. mDNS possibly falls across > the boundary between in and out of scope - useful if it's a > fundamental > feature of all IPv6 CPE (in scope), but only really there to > facilitate > CPE configuration (out of scope). We had a thread, a year ago, on an IETF list (I thought it was v6ops?) about how we might do something like http://ce-router, but I don't recall where it went. I agree with you that a standard way for the CE router to be found would be beneficial, so the vendor could create a one-page instruction manual that shows its simple-to-type HTTP URI. Could we get consensus that mDNS is the way to accomplish this goal? For example, when you say mDNS do you mean RFC4795 (which was previously called draft-ietf-dnsext-mdns), draft-mdns-rfc-informational-00 (published November 2009), or draft-cheshire-dnsext-multicastdns. I believe you mean draft-cheshire-dnsext-multicastdns. -d > Regards, > Mark. > > > > > -d > > > > > > > Regards, > > > Mark. > > > > > > > > > > > If none objects that motivation for use of ULA needs to be > > > included as > > > > text in the CE Rtr doc, what we can do is work on a formal > > > version of > > > > what I have summarized above. > > > > > > > > Further, in an earlier version of the CE Rtr we also said > > > the ULA and > > > > the GUA coexist on a LAN network interface. Since the addresses > > > > coexist, here is what our earlier version said about RFC 3484. > > > > > > > > "... every LAN interface has a link-local unicast address, > > > a ULA, and a > > > > GUA. Therefore, the interface has to apply source address > > > selection to > > > > determine which address to use as a source for outgoing > > > packets. Since > > > > the GUA and ULA have a larger scope than the link-local > > > address (rule #2 > > > > of [RFC3484]), the GUA or ULA will be used as a source > address of > > > > outgoing packets that are not subject to rule #1. For > > > source address > > > > selection between a GUA and ULA, rule #8 of [RFC3484] > will be used." > > > > > > > > In the -03 version we have removed such text. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Hemant > > > > > > From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 16:22:38 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CF6C3A688B for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 16:22:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.524 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.524 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.075, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oTKSGdstkd5T for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 16:22:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DD6A3A657C for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 16:22:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSJZx-000NYY-Qp for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 00:16:49 +0000 Received: from [64.102.122.149] (helo=rtp-iport-2.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSJZp-000NXg-Ub for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 00:16:42 +0000 Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-2.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAEplQ0tAZnwN/2dsb2JhbAC/LpRQhDAE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,225,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="78504269" Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com ([64.102.124.13]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 Jan 2010 00:16:40 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-102.cisco.com ([72.163.62.189]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o060GeTw003802; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 00:16:40 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-114.cisco.com ([72.163.62.156]) by xbh-rcd-102.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 5 Jan 2010 18:16:40 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 18:16:34 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <067c01ca8e5b$a79b4760$c5f0200a@cisco.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] Thread-Index: AcqOWA9kL6AtZl06QtyDdDBE5W/7/gAAYsQAAALOixA= References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com><048501ca8e39$65613570$c5f0200a@cisco.com><4B43977A.1040706@gmail.com><053201ca8e43$e7b19b50$c5f0200a@cisco.com><20100106083617.1f1ae7ab@opy.nosense.org><060601ca8e53$c38ae550$c5f0200a@cisco.com> <20100106091013.769d3cc5@opy.nosense.org> <067c01ca8e5b$a79b4760$c5f0200a@cisco.com> From: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" To: "Dan Wing (dwing)" , "Mark Smith" Cc: "Brian E Carpenter" , "Fred Baker (fred)" , , , , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jan 2010 00:16:40.0397 (UTC) FILETIME=[84C737D0:01CA8E65] Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Mark and Dan, Please see this draft below which is a placeholder for any work moved out of CE Rtr Phase I work. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wbeebee-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-bis-01 Please see section 6.4. One reason we moved zeroconf out of Phase I of the CE Rtr document is because folks may not agree if zeroconf even belongs in an IETF CE Rtr document. Another reason was to decide what IETF RFC we could use to reference mDNS - that is what you guys are currently discussing. Thanks, Hemant=20 From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 16:56:56 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17F7928C121 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 16:56:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -107.439 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-107.439 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.440, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Qg-mRu4VmAG1 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 16:56:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31EA628C10F for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 16:56:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSK96-0000zh-E3 for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 00:53:08 +0000 Received: from [171.68.10.86] (helo=sj-iport-4.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSK90-0000xw-Kc for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 00:53:02 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-4.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,225,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="70518704" Received: from sj-core-4.cisco.com ([171.68.223.138]) by sj-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 Jan 2010 00:53:02 +0000 Received: from dwingwxp01 ([10.32.240.197]) by sj-core-4.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o060r1Nk009705; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 00:53:01 GMT From: "Dan Wing" To: "'Hemant Singh \(shemant\)'" , "'Mark Smith'" Cc: "'Brian E Carpenter'" , "'Fred Baker \(fred\)'" , , , , References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com><048501ca8e39$65613570$c5f0200a@cisco.com><4B43977A.1040706@gmail.com><053201ca8e43$e7b19b50$c5f0200a@cisco.com><20100106083617.1f1ae7ab@opy.nosense.org><060601ca8e53$c38ae550$c5f0200a@cisco.com> <20100106091013.769d3cc5@opy.nosense.org> <067c01ca8e5b$a79b4760$c5f0200a@cisco.com> Subject: RE: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 16:53:00 -0800 Message-ID: <06a901ca8e6a$987d5a70$c5f0200a@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: AcqOWA9kL6AtZl06QtyDdDBE5W/7/gAAYsQAAALOixAAAVsQoA== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Hemant Singh (shemant) [mailto:shemant@cisco.com] > Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 4:17 PM > To: Dan Wing (dwing); Mark Smith > Cc: Brian E Carpenter; Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops.ietf.org; > kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net; > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router@tools.ietf.org > Subject: RE: ULAs [Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC] > > Mark and Dan, > > Please see this draft below which is a placeholder for any work moved > out of CE Rtr Phase I work. > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wbeebee-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-bis-01 > > Please see section 6.4. One reason we moved zeroconf out of > Phase I of > the CE Rtr document is because folks may not agree if zeroconf even > belongs in an IETF CE Rtr document. Another reason was to decide what > IETF RFC we could use to reference mDNS - that is what you guys are > currently discussing. So - that means nobody cares about how to provision the CE router, or it means we leave it to vendors, or we assume IPv4 will be used to configure the CE router (e.g., the common 192.168.1.1), or is the problem just that we lack a stable reference for mDNS? I'm sure you recall, between the time draft-wbeebee-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-bis-01 was posted (October 2009) and today, there was a long and active discussion on the main IETF list regarding Cheshire's multicast DNS; would that discussion and its conclusion (whatever that may be) have bearing on v6ops decision to pull mDNS from draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router? -d > Thanks, > > Hemant > > > From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Tue Jan 5 21:44:33 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 850273A67F9 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 21:44:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.292 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.292 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.552, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SC_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9knSADs9p1FW for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 21:44:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from ppp-58-9-123-18.revip2.asianet.co.th (ppp-58-9-121-131.revip2.asianet.co.th [58.9.121.131]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3519E3A67CC for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 21:44:24 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100106054425.3519E3A67CC@core3.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 21:44:24 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 INOYLAVA. All rights reserved.
From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Tue Jan 5 21:44:54 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 672FA3A66B4 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 21:44:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.292 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.292 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.552, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SC_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id C18DBE5RjP-z for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 21:44:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from ppp-58-9-123-18.revip2.asianet.co.th (ppp-58-9-121-131.revip2.asianet.co.th [58.9.121.131]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A04703A6801 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 21:44:45 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100106054445.A04703A6801@core3.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 21:44:45 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 EYBAB. All rights reserved.
From account@mail.com Wed Jan 6 03:35:08 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 039833A68CC for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 03:35:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.251 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.251 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_EQ_BR=0.955, HOST_EQ_BR=1.295] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w2dXX9p-IEcR for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 03:35:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.faculdadedofuturo.edu.br (mail.faculdadedofuturo.edu.br [200.202.220.52]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91A223A6874 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 03:35:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.faculdadedofuturo.edu.br (Postfix, from userid 1042) id 132153C154; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:32:48 -0200 (BRST) Received: from webmail.faculdadedofuturo.edu.br (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.faculdadedofuturo.edu.br (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1A643C0EC; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:32:44 -0200 (BRST) Received: from 212.100.250.227 (proxying for 41.138.182.197) (SquirrelMail authenticated user flavio) by webmail.faculdadedofuturo.edu.br with HTTP; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:32:44 -0200 (BRST) Message-ID: <59960.212.100.250.227.1262777564.squirrel@webmail.faculdadedofuturo.edu.br> Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:32:44 -0200 (BRST) Subject: Important: Email Account Verification Update ! ! ! From: "Webmail Upgrading Unit" Reply-To: upgrading009@live.com User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal To: undisclosed-recipients:; The Helpdesk Program that periodically checks the size of your e-mail space is sending you this information. The program runs weekly to ensure your inbox does not grow too large, thus preventing you from receiving or sending new e-mail. As this message is being sent, you have 18 megabytes (MB) or more stored in your inbox. To help us reset your space in our database, please enter your current User name (_______) Password (______) You will receive a periodic alert if your inbox size is between 18 and 20 MB. If your inbox size is 20 MB, a program on your Webmail will move your oldest e-mails to a folder in your home directory to ensure you can continue receiving incoming e-mail. You will be notified this has taken place. If your inbox grows to 25 MB, you will be unable to receive new e-mail and it will be returned to sender. All this is programmed to ensure your e-mail continues to function well. Thank you for your cooperation. Help Desk. Important: Email Account Verification Update ! ! ! From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Wed Jan 6 06:41:59 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D78053A67B3 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 06:41:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id O5zSTLNKiJRF for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 06:41:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F9DC3A6830 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 06:41:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSWwW-000EfL-QV for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 14:33:00 +0000 Received: from [64.102.122.148] (helo=rtp-iport-1.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSWwQ-000Eek-PN for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 14:32:54 +0000 Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAHItREtAZnwN/2dsb2JhbAC+eJNYhDAE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,229,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="78535368" Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com ([64.102.124.13]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 Jan 2010 14:32:53 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-102.cisco.com ([72.163.62.175]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o06EWrZ1028213; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 14:32:53 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-201.cisco.com ([72.163.62.208]) by xbh-rcd-102.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 08:32:53 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 08:32:52 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Index: AcqNWC7D0NSBCdUKTgCgAaETCoD48wAQ+GfgAAtQ+EAAFkkNcAAD5w6QAAjVHBAAIdxRQA== References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> From: "Wes Beebee (wbeebee)" To: "Templin, Fred L" , "Hemant Singh (shemant)" , "Fred Baker (fred)" , Cc: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jan 2010 14:32:53.0253 (UTC) FILETIME=[2162F350:01CA8EDD] Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: If IsRouter is FALSE, Linux will incorrectly garbage collect the addresses, leading to lack of connectivity. What mischief happens if the CE Router always sets IsRouter to TRUE on both WAN and LAN interfaces? - Wes From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Wed Jan 6 07:44:42 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 860213A6866 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 07:44:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -31.642 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-31.642 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_BR=0.955, HOST_EQ_BR=1.295, HOST_EQ_STATIC=1.172, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, SARE_RECV_IP_200150=0.612, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HmP5Rd0IG+aK for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 07:44:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from 200-150-182-166.static-corp.ajato.com.br (200-150-182-166.static-corp.ajato.com.br [200.150.182.166]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 136283A6830 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 07:44:39 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100106154440.136283A6830@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 07:44:39 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Qsetqsep Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Wed Jan 6 07:46:31 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 355993A6809 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 07:46:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -32.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-32.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_BR=0.955, HELO_MISMATCH_BR=2.4, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_NONE=0.1, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JO9HOqj2nO+p for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 07:46:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from 200-150-182-166.static-corp.ajato.com.br (unknown [189.120.73.93]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD15E3A6866 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 07:46:28 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100106154628.BD15E3A6866@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 07:46:28 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Elivihi Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Wed Jan 6 07:48:04 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1E103A6812 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 07:48:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -31.642 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-31.642 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_BR=0.955, HOST_EQ_BR=1.295, HOST_EQ_STATIC=1.172, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, SARE_RECV_IP_200150=0.612, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1mOrCuLvXqhQ for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 07:48:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from 200-150-182-166.static-corp.ajato.com.br (200-150-182-166.static-corp.ajato.com.br [200.150.182.166]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 592153A6809 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 07:48:02 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100106154802.592153A6809@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 07:48:02 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Pqljnodicykq Corporation.
All rights reserved

From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Wed Jan 6 08:31:20 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 039DD3A68A3 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 08:31:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.539 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.539 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.060, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yakja14HqGJQ for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 08:31:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94C6828C113 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 08:31:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSYgx-0003NY-Fk for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 16:25:03 +0000 Received: from [64.102.122.148] (helo=rtp-iport-1.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSYgA-0003Ev-7o for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 16:24:15 +0000 Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAHBIREtAZnwN/2dsb2JhbAC/TJNihDAE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,230,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="78559206" Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com ([64.102.124.13]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 Jan 2010 16:24:13 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-102.cisco.com ([72.163.62.175]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o06GOCgj010384; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 16:24:13 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-114.cisco.com ([72.163.62.156]) by xbh-rcd-102.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 10:24:12 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 10:24:11 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Index: AcqNWC7D0NSBCdUKTgCgAaETCoD48wAQ+GfgAAtQ+EAAFkkNcAAD5w6QAAjVHBAAIpV00A== References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> From: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" To: "Templin, Fred L" , "Fred Baker (fred)" , Cc: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jan 2010 16:24:12.0948 (UTC) FILETIME=[AECB8540:01CA8EEC] Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Fred, It's a well-known problem in Linux that the OS incorrectly combined the Neighbor Cache and the Destination cache causing data forwarding failures and incorrect on-link assumptions. This problem you are alluding to about the IsRouter is another bug in the Linux code as to why the OS has FIB clearing entries in the Neighbor Cache? The FIB is the Prefix List, the Destination Cache, and the Default Router List; the FIB should not touch the Neighbor Cache. I do grant you an OS can independently garbage collect entries in the Neighbor Cache and the OS is also not non-compliant for ND if the OS deletes entries in the Neighbor Cache with IsRouter flag set to FALSE. Note ND RFC 4861 does not say anything about garbage collecting entries in the Neighbor Cache with IsRouter flag set to FALSE. =20 Now, when anyone reports a bug to me, I try to ascertain the severity of the bug. The issue you raise does not look severe to me, It's a temporary problem that can fix itself. If an OS has this garbage collection nuance and the Neighbor Cache entry is deleted, when the next packet needs to be sent to the node whose entry was deleted in the SP rtr, ND address resolution will take place and resolve the address causing the Neighbor Cache to be populated again. ND also specifies the packet be held in a queue till the packet's destination is resolved - so the SP rtr is not likely to drop any packets. Wes already asked, what if the CE Rtr always sets the IsRouter flag in ND messages where this flag is possible to be set and that should take care of your Linux problem. If the CE Rtr sends an NA, the CE Rtr will set the IsRouter flag to TRUE.=20 Did we miss anything? Thanks, Hemant From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Wed Jan 6 08:52:36 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 173753A687A for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 08:52:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.444 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.444 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.155, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aX3nj+n+KCU0 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 08:52:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49F5B3A6803 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 08:52:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSZ3j-0007Xc-JW for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 16:48:35 +0000 Received: from [130.76.96.56] (helo=stl-smtpout-01.boeing.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSZ3c-0007Wi-0R for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 16:48:28 +0000 Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (blv-av-01.boeing.com [130.247.48.231]) by stl-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/8.14.0/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id o06Gm83U026360 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 10:48:09 -0600 (CST) Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o06Gm8Xh002454; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 08:48:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NWHT-10.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwht-10.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.25.113]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o06Gm8CU002449 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 08:48:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.64.97]) by XCH-NWHT-10.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.25.113]) with mapi; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 08:48:08 -0800 From: "Templin, Fred L" To: "Wes Beebee (wbeebee)" , "Hemant Singh (shemant)" , "Fred Baker (fred)" , "v6ops@ops.ietf.org" CC: "kurtis@kurtis.pp.se" , "rbonica@juniper.net" Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 08:47:51 -0800 Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Topic: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Index: AcqNWC7D0NSBCdUKTgCgAaETCoD48wAQ+GfgAAtQ+EAAFkkNcAAD5w6QAAjVHBAAIdxRQAAEMDgQ Message-ID: References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Wes, > -----Original Message----- > From: Wes Beebee (wbeebee) [mailto:wbeebee@cisco.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 6:33 AM > To: Templin, Fred L; Hemant Singh (shemant); Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops= .ietf.org > Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net > Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ie= tf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router- > 03.txt WGLC) >=20 > If IsRouter is FALSE, Linux will incorrectly garbage collect the > addresses, leading to lack of connectivity. Linux will garbage collect FIB entries (not addresses) but I'm not sure the behavior is incorrect. And yes, this leads to lack of connectivity. > What mischief happens if the CE Router always sets IsRouter to TRUE on > both WAN and LAN interfaces? The IsRouter flag associated with an interface (described in Section 6.2.1) is distinct and different from the IsRouter flag associated with neighbor cache entries (described in Section 5.1). It seems odd that the same name (IsRouter) is used for two different purposes in RFC4861, but the case we are discussing is the latter (nbr cache entries). But, the concern I have is for the IsRouter setting in=20 SP router neighbor cache entries; not for IsRouter settings in the CE router. The two are unrelated, and it is the possibility of the SP router garbage collecting FIB entries that concerns me. Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com=20 > - Wes From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Wed Jan 6 09:13:16 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D3283A6900 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:13:16 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.475 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.475 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.124, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fY5o40pN+ViQ for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:13:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DDAC3A68C0 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:13:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSZNL-000BBV-CK for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 17:08:51 +0000 Received: from [130.76.96.56] (helo=stl-smtpout-01.boeing.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSZND-000BAY-70 for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 17:08:43 +0000 Received: from stl-av-01.boeing.com (stl-av-01.boeing.com [192.76.190.6]) by stl-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/8.14.0/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id o06H8aaj015629 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 11:08:36 -0600 (CST) Received: from stl-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by stl-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o06H8alM009274; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 11:08:36 -0600 (CST) Received: from XCH-NWHT-10.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwht-10.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.25.113]) by stl-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o06H8ZsW009242 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 11:08:35 -0600 (CST) Received: from XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.64.97]) by XCH-NWHT-10.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.25.113]) with mapi; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:08:35 -0800 From: "Templin, Fred L" To: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" , "Fred Baker (fred)" , "v6ops@ops.ietf.org" CC: "kurtis@kurtis.pp.se" , "rbonica@juniper.net" Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:08:17 -0800 Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Topic: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Index: AcqNWC7D0NSBCdUKTgCgAaETCoD48wAQ+GfgAAtQ+EAAFkkNcAAD5w6QAAjVHBAAIpV00AAEFfTA Message-ID: References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hemant, > -----Original Message----- > From: Hemant Singh (shemant) [mailto:shemant@cisco.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 8:24 AM > To: Templin, Fred L; Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops.ietf.org > Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net > Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ie= tf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router- > 03.txt WGLC) >=20 > Fred, >=20 > It's a well-known problem in Linux that the OS incorrectly combined the > Neighbor Cache and the Destination cache causing data forwarding > failures and incorrect on-link assumptions. This problem you are > alluding to about the IsRouter is another bug in the Linux code as to > why the OS has FIB clearing entries in the Neighbor Cache? Not quite; the OS seems to clear *FIB entries* based on the setting of the IsRouter flag in the neighbor cache entry corresponding to the nexthop. The OS does not clear entries in the nbr cache. > The FIB is > the Prefix List, the Destination Cache, and the Default Router List; the > FIB should not touch the Neighbor Cache. I do grant you an OS can > independently garbage collect entries in the Neighbor Cache and the OS > is also not non-compliant for ND if the OS deletes entries in the > Neighbor Cache with IsRouter flag set to FALSE. Note ND RFC 4861 does > not say anything about garbage collecting entries in the Neighbor Cache > with IsRouter flag set to FALSE. No, I am not talking about garbage collecting *nbr cache* entries based on IsRouter; I am talking about garbage collecting *FIB entries* which can lead to loss of connectivity. I have said this a number of times now. Wes said it in his message, too. > Now, when anyone reports a bug to me, I try to ascertain the severity of > the bug. The issue you raise does not look severe to me, It's a > temporary problem that can fix itself. Fix itself how? Once the FIB entry is gone there would need to be some protocol for bringing it back and I don't see that specified anywhere. And, unless the nbr cache entry IsRouter flag gets set to TRUE, the FIB entry could just be garbage collected all over again resulting in the same loss of connectivity. > If an OS has this garbage > collection nuance and the Neighbor Cache entry is deleted, when the next > packet needs to be sent to the node whose entry was deleted in the SP > rtr, ND address resolution will take place and resolve the address > causing the Neighbor Cache to be populated again. ND also specifies the > packet be held in a queue till the packet's destination is resolved - so > the SP rtr is not likely to drop any packets. See above - it is FIB entry deletion and not nbr cache entry deletion that concerns me. > Wes already asked, what if the CE Rtr always sets the IsRouter flag in > ND messages where this flag is possible to be set and that should take > care of your Linux problem. If the CE Rtr sends an NA, the CE Rtr will > set the IsRouter flag to TRUE. I already said this both in an off-list message and more recently on-list. If the CE router sends an RS, then the SP router will set IsRouter in its nbr cache entry for the CE router to FALSE. But, if the CE router subsequently sends an NA message with the R bit (i.e., the Router bit) set to TRUE, the SP router will set IsRouter in the nbr cache entry to TRUE and the danger of FIB entry deletion is averted. Two problems with this however. First, it requires the CE router to send a gratuitous NA message. Secondly, the CE router has no way of knowing if the SP router has received the NA message. > Did we miss anything? Yes, but I think I clarified it above? Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com > Thanks, >=20 > Hemant From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Wed Jan 6 11:19:03 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 874B928C0FD for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 11:19:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_23=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pSZjMI9RvT6u for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 11:19:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A01E3A6814 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 11:19:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSbI7-00046E-1W for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 19:11:35 +0000 Received: from [64.102.122.149] (helo=rtp-iport-2.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSbHy-00045c-45 for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 19:11:26 +0000 Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-2.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAFRvREutJV2Z/2dsb2JhbAC/OpNihDAE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,230,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="78708151" Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 Jan 2010 19:11:24 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-202.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-202.cisco.com [72.163.62.201]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o06JBOfp001984; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 19:11:24 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-201.cisco.com ([72.163.62.208]) by xbh-rcd-202.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:11:24 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:11:22 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Index: AcqNWC7D0NSBCdUKTgCgAaETCoD48wAQ+GfgAAtQ+EAAFkkNcAAD5w6QAAjVHBAAIpV00AAEFfTAAAN1lLA= References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> From: "Wes Beebee (wbeebee)" To: "Templin, Fred L" , "Hemant Singh (shemant)" , "Fred Baker (fred)" , Cc: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jan 2010 19:11:24.0517 (UTC) FILETIME=[0A137950:01CA8F04] Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: > Not quite; the OS seems to clear *FIB entries* based on the setting of the IsRouter flag in the > neighbor cache entry corresponding to the nexthop. The OS does not clear entries in the nbr cache. >From RFC 4861: "Router Solicitations in which the Source Address is the unspecified address MUST NOT update the router's Neighbor Cache; solicitations with a proper source address update the Neighbor Cache as follows. ... Whether or not a Source Link-Layer Address option is provided, if a Neighbor Cache entry for the solicitation's sender exists (or is created) the entry's IsRouter flag MUST be set to FALSE." > But, if the CE router subsequently sends an NA message with the R bit (i.e., the Router bit) set to > TRUE, the SP router will set IsRouter in the nbr cache entry to TRUE and the danger of FIB entry > deletion is averted. Well, the CE Router may need to receive an RA in order to know how to do address acquisition on its WAN interface (doing SLAAC/DHCP, etc.). Waiting for a periodic RA may not be feasible in some deployments, so a CE Router MAY send an RS in order to increase the chances of receiving an RA in a timely manner. We don't want to block CE Routers from ever sending RS's on their WAN interface. Garbage collecting the FIB entries based on IsRouter value in the Neighbor Cache is not specifically prohibited by RFC 4861 - so we're not talking about a non-compliance issue. =20 >From RFC 4861: "To limit the storage needed for the Destination and Neighbor Caches, a node may need to garbage-collect old entries. However, care must be taken to ensure that sufficient space is always present to hold the working set of active entries. A small cache may result in an excessive number of Neighbor Discovery messages if entries are discarded and rebuilt in quick succession. Any Least Recently Used (LRU)-based policy that only reclaims entries that have not been used in some time (e.g., ten minutes or more) should be adequate for garbage-collecting unused entries. A node should retain entries in the Default Router List and the Prefix List until their lifetimes expire. However, a node may garbage-collect entries prematurely if it is low on memory. If not all routers are kept on the Default Router list, a node should retain at least two entries in the Default Router List (and preferably more) in order to maintain robust connectivity for off-link destinations." And, sending a gratuitous NA after an RA solely for the purpose of preventing Linux running on the SP from GC'ing the CE Router entry has the problems that you've already identified, and seems like a hack: > Two problems with this however. First, it requires the CE router to send a gratuitous NA message. > Secondly, the CE router has no way of knowing if the SP router has received the NA message. I think the only other options are to say "don't GC if IsRouter is FALSE" to Linux, which may not be an option if you run out of space, or make sure that there's enough space that you don't GC more often than you'd expect traffic from the CE Router to keep the entries alive, which is already recommended by RFC 4861: "However, care must be taken to ensure that sufficient space is always=20 present to hold the working set of active entries." I think we've analyzed the problem fully now. From a specification standpoint, I don't know what you want us to do. From a practical implementation standpoint, I think you know what you're options are. - Wes -----Original Message----- From: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Templin, Fred L Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 12:08 PM To: Hemant Singh (shemant); Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops.ietf.org Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Hemant, > -----Original Message----- > From: Hemant Singh (shemant) [mailto:shemant@cisco.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 8:24 AM > To: Templin, Fred L; Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops.ietf.org > Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net > Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE:=20 > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router- 03.txt WGLC) >=20 > Fred, >=20 > It's a well-known problem in Linux that the OS incorrectly combined=20 > the Neighbor Cache and the Destination cache causing data forwarding=20 > failures and incorrect on-link assumptions. This problem you are=20 > alluding to about the IsRouter is another bug in the Linux code as to=20 > why the OS has FIB clearing entries in the Neighbor Cache? Not quite; the OS seems to clear *FIB entries* based on the setting of the IsRouter flag in the neighbor cache entry corresponding to the nexthop. The OS does not clear entries in the nbr cache. > The FIB is > the Prefix List, the Destination Cache, and the Default Router List;=20 > the FIB should not touch the Neighbor Cache. I do grant you an OS can > independently garbage collect entries in the Neighbor Cache and the OS > is also not non-compliant for ND if the OS deletes entries in the=20 > Neighbor Cache with IsRouter flag set to FALSE. Note ND RFC 4861 does > not say anything about garbage collecting entries in the Neighbor=20 > Cache with IsRouter flag set to FALSE. No, I am not talking about garbage collecting *nbr cache* entries based on IsRouter; I am talking about garbage collecting *FIB entries* which can lead to loss of connectivity. I have said this a number of times now. Wes said it in his message, too. > Now, when anyone reports a bug to me, I try to ascertain the severity=20 > of the bug. The issue you raise does not look severe to me, It's a=20 > temporary problem that can fix itself. Fix itself how? Once the FIB entry is gone there would need to be some protocol for bringing it back and I don't see that specified anywhere. And, unless the nbr cache entry IsRouter flag gets set to TRUE, the FIB entry could just be garbage collected all over again resulting in the same loss of connectivity. > If an OS has this garbage > collection nuance and the Neighbor Cache entry is deleted, when the=20 > next packet needs to be sent to the node whose entry was deleted in=20 > the SP rtr, ND address resolution will take place and resolve the=20 > address causing the Neighbor Cache to be populated again. ND also=20 > specifies the packet be held in a queue till the packet's destination=20 > is resolved - so the SP rtr is not likely to drop any packets. See above - it is FIB entry deletion and not nbr cache entry deletion that concerns me. > Wes already asked, what if the CE Rtr always sets the IsRouter flag in > ND messages where this flag is possible to be set and that should take > care of your Linux problem. If the CE Rtr sends an NA, the CE Rtr=20 > will set the IsRouter flag to TRUE. I already said this both in an off-list message and more recently on-list. If the CE router sends an RS, then the SP router will set IsRouter in its nbr cache entry for the CE router to FALSE. But, if the CE router subsequently sends an NA message with the R bit (i.e., the Router bit) set to TRUE, the SP router will set IsRouter in the nbr cache entry to TRUE and the danger of FIB entry deletion is averted. Two problems with this however. First, it requires the CE router to send a gratuitous NA message. Secondly, the CE router has no way of knowing if the SP router has received the NA message. > Did we miss anything? Yes, but I think I clarified it above? Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com > Thanks, >=20 > Hemant From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Wed Jan 6 11:28:41 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 380B73A6814 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 11:28:41 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 11:28:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from 200-215-102-246.jvece7005.e.brasiltelecom.net.br (200-215-102-246.jvece7005.e.brasiltelecom.net.br [200.215.102.246]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 5314128C146 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 11:28:32 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: Member v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org get 80 0FF on ALL Pfizer To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100106192833.5314128C146@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 11:28:32 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 03848 Inc. All rights reserved.

From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Wed Jan 6 12:03:40 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBCB428C0F0 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:03:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g2mIYNAj+TEu for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:03:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 625FC28C144 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:03:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSc2y-000Bow-UF for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 20:00:00 +0000 Received: from [209.85.220.225] (helo=mail-fx0-f225.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSc2r-000BoB-6X for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 19:59:53 +0000 Received: by fxm25 with SMTP id 25so10519490fxm.1 for ; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 11:59:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=mf1GRLzm/5P4qfBRyeXNFj2yqQyEHHXxgHmtO1vSap4=; b=Tk+Zn8zn0vaK3wBzal2aw6KcQ5QJC90x3QB2Qf4JaevQtBzZYguBuPot9tk+6WaA/t uJ2qZ5LI5r21qqUsFXvkL2FB94v6LVPfc9GtXmxca7B+voU3Wg6672cXWWVPPof3PiMD uRGCU2BkjX7aXK1Qf2qAI+V8uuJpHSbwzaSl0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=blzTrCWlkKRHsPUm+YLVAIu9txjO+qBp+XjEuUNxn01l19R32KIgz2+G+bDBfVUgsu pPIAR6BLlO3OSrhY+fXW1CfGXQw1e3kdqko0zlhc+rUblUpeix3iYrNoZY+HwQcOjJdq A+dwJqmbwOFkZOYKiXEIfWkirkyOIcEz0Zh9o= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.239.167.83 with SMTP id f19mr2951206hbe.34.1262807991306; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 11:59:51 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 20:59:51 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 262f5a5889f9a5fd Message-ID: <2bbba3c11001061159j1b07e5ceq3b56b4ac5f696f33@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) From: Ole Troan To: "Templin, Fred L" Cc: Fred Baker , "v6ops@ops.ietf.org" , "kurtis@kurtis.pp.se" , "rbonica@juniper.net" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Fred, the IsRouter flag only has value to a host, so that it can detect that its default router is changing state from a router to a host. in this scenario which is really a router-to-router link I cannot see any problem with the service provider end getting the flag wrong. it is after all not used for anything on a routed interface. if an implementation deletes neighbor entries on a routed interface based on a change in this flag, then that's a bug. cheers, Ole On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 2:00 AM, Templin, Fred L wrote: > Fred, > > A concern I raised on the list a while back centers around > the behavior of the CPE router acting as a host on its WAN > interface per section 4.1: > > =A0"When the router is attached to the WAN interface link it must act as > =A0 an IPv6 host for the purposes of stateless or stateful interface > =A0 address assignment ([RFC4862]/[RFC3315])." > > and per WPD-3: > > =A0"WPD-3: =A0Absent of other routing information the IPv6 CE router MUST > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 use Router Discovery as specified in [RFC4861] to dis= cover a > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 default router and install a default route in its rou= ting > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 table with the discovered router's address as the nex= t-hop." > > To my understanding, this behavior would involve the CPE > router sending Router Solicitation (RS) messages on its > WAN interface in order to receive Router Advertisement (RA) > messages. According to Section 6.2.6 of RFC4861, however: > > =A0"Whether or not a Source Link-Layer > =A0 Address option is provided, if a Neighbor Cache entry for the > =A0 (RS)'s sender exists (or is created) the entry's IsRouter flag > =A0 MUST be set to FALSE." > > RFC4861 goes to some level of detail to specify the setting > of the IsRouter flag under various circumstances (including > the RS case), but it only says what actions should be taken > based on the flag as result of receiving Neighbor Advertisement > messages. Other actions based on the IsRouter flag setting do > not seem to be specified. > > In the linux kernel, it appears that the kernel will in some > circumstances garbage-collect FIB entries that have a nexthop > with the IsRouter flag set to FALSE. It is not clear what other > router implementations would do based on the IsRouter setting, > but it seems odd that the IsRouter flag in neighbor cache > entries corresponding to CPE routers would be set to FALSE > which in the linux case at least may lead to interoperability > issues. > > As a result, it might be worth reconsidering whether it is > appropriate for the CPE router to send an RS which might > confuse other routers into thinking it is a host. > > Fred > fred.l.templin@boeing.com > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On Beha= lf Of Fred Baker >> Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 7:45 AM >> To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org >> Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net >> Subject: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC >> >> This is to initiate a two week working group last call of draft-ietf- >> v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt. Please read it now. If you find nits >> (spelling errors, minor suggested wording changes, etc), comment to >> the authors; if you find greater issues, such as disagreeing with a >> statement or finding additional issues that need to be addressed, >> please post your comments to the list. >> >> We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the >> document as well as its content. If you have read the document and >> believe it to be of operational utility, that is also an important >> comment to make. >> >> >> >> >> On Dec 18, 2009, at 2:45 AM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: >> >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >> directories. >> This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the >> IETF. >> >> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Title =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : Basic Requirements for IPv6 Cust= omer Edge Routers >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Author(s) =A0 =A0 =A0 : H. Singh, et al. >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Filename =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-0= 3.txt >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Pages =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : 14 >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Date =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: 2009-12-18 >> >> This document specifies requirements for an IPv6 Customer Edge (CE) >> router. =A0Specifically, the current version of this document focuses >> on the provisioning of an IPv6 CE router and the provisioning of IPv6 >> hosts attached to it. >> >> Status of this Memo >> >> This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the >> provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. >> >> Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering >> Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. =A0Note that >> other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- >> Drafts. >> >> Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months >> and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any >> time. =A0It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference >> material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." >> >> The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at >> http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. >> >> The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at >> http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. >> >> This Internet-Draft will expire on June 21, 2010. >> >> Copyright Notice >> >> Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the >> document authors. =A0All rights reserved. >> >> This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal >> Provisions Relating to IETF Documents >> (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of >> publication of this document. =A0Please review these documents >> carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect >> to this document. =A0Code Components extracted from this document must >> include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of >> the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as >> described in the BSD License. >> >> A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.= txt >> >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >> >> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader >> implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the >> Internet-Draft. >> _______________________________________________ >> I-D-Announce mailing list >> I-D-Announce@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >> Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html >> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >> >> http://www.ipinc.net/IPv4.GIF >> > > > From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Wed Jan 6 12:41:05 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0957C3A6959 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:41:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.549 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.549 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KSYVlWTqQKN9 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:41:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 166943A693F for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:41:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NScYj-000GFt-Dr for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 20:32:49 +0000 Received: from [64.102.122.148] (helo=rtp-iport-1.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NScYc-000GFJ-Tq for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 20:32:43 +0000 Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEANKBREutJV2c/2dsb2JhbADAB5NdhDAE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,231,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="78615152" Received: from rcdn-core-5.cisco.com ([173.37.93.156]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 Jan 2010 20:32:41 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-202.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-202.cisco.com [72.163.62.201]) by rcdn-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o06KWfhK024275; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 20:32:41 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-114.cisco.com ([72.163.62.156]) by xbh-rcd-202.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 14:32:41 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 14:32:34 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Index: AcqNWC7D0NSBCdUKTgCgAaETCoD48wAQ+GfgAAtQ+EAAFkkNcAAD5w6QAAjVHBAAIpV00AAEFfTAAAW1mPA= References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> From: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" To: "Templin, Fred L" , "Fred Baker (fred)" , Cc: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jan 2010 20:32:41.0423 (UTC) FILETIME=[64F045F0:01CA8F0F] Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Fred, For any further discussion, may I suggest using terminology from RFC 4861, otherwise we spend more time to understand each other. I keep saying the problem is temporary (yes, that is a pause in traffic flow) and the problem will be fixed automatically but you send a reply back saying "no the problem is not fixed automatically". Also, my statements are based on what I have been able to understand thus far from your emails - this understanding may not be correct. If you use the team FIB, please define in terms of conceptual data structs defined in RFC 4861. Wes tells me what you refer to as FIB is the Destination Cache. But to me, the FIB is a collection of the Destination Cache, the Prefix List, and the Default Router List. Now we both think that what you call as FIB is the routing table on the SP rtr. Further, I believe what I call as the Neighbor Cache, you refer to it as nbr.=20 Now if a routing table entry is deleted from the SP Rtr, then it is indeed a problem for which routing protocols are required. However, note that the SPs do not want any routing protocols between the CE Rtr and the SP Rtr. So then, really, it's a question of the SP Rtr be designed properly as per SP Rtr quality standards and have its routing table cache be sized appropriately.=20 Please also note, if it's a routing table entry that got nuked, the Conceptual Sending Algorithm of RFC 4861 does not apply to routing of packets by the SP Rtr - the algorithm is applicable only to a host. However, if the SP Rtr sources a packet destined to, say, a host behind the CE Rtr, then the Conceptual Sending Algorithm is legal to use and here is how it would work in your situation. Let's say the Destination Cache has the destination nuked. The Conceptual Sending Algorithm looks up the destination in the Prefix List. The Prefix List returns the destination for the host behind the CE Rtr as off-link. Then the Neighbor Cache is looked up - since you said, the Neighbor Cache entry is not nuked, the lookup succeeds and the packet is sent out and also a Destination Cache entry is created.=20 So again, as per Wes's email, the summary is still that this problem you describe just needs a properly designed SP Rtr. Your problem does not need any changes be made to the CE Rtr draft nor any changes to the ND RFC nor any other RFC. Thanks, Hemant & Wes From secmech-request@lists.ietf.org Wed Jan 6 12:49:41 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F60C3A6961 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:49:41 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: <85vvVnKk+3S5> X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:49:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from host249-79-static.44-88-b.business.telecomitalia.it (host249-79-static.44-88-b.business.telecomitalia.it [88.44.79.249]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 3A6763A689F for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:49:25 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: Personal 72% off To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100106204932.3A6763A689F@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:49:25 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 51613 Inc. All rights reserved.

From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Wed Jan 6 12:51:11 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A1943A6967 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:51:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.556 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.556 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.043, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Stp888XVGLgR for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:51:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C0CC3A6961 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:51:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NScpj-000IsK-IG for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 20:50:23 +0000 Received: from [171.71.176.70] (helo=sj-iport-1.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NScpc-000IrT-Ut for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 20:50:17 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAM+FREurR7Ht/2dsb2JhbADAEJNihDAE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,231,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="285561522" Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com ([171.71.177.237]) by sj-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 Jan 2010 20:50:16 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com [72.163.62.200]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o06KoG8O019448; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 20:50:16 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-114.cisco.com ([72.163.62.156]) by xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 14:50:16 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 14:50:08 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Index: AcqNWC7D0NSBCdUKTgCgAaETCoD48wAQ+GfgAAtQ+EAAFkkNcAAD5w6QAAjVHBAAIpV00AAEFfTAAAW1mPAAAoNAQA== References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> From: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" To: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" , "Templin, Fred L" , "Fred Baker (fred)" , Cc: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jan 2010 20:50:16.0284 (UTC) FILETIME=[D9AF49C0:01CA8F11] Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Fred, Humble apologies for missing one step in our description below. Please change the following text from our email FROM: "The Prefix List returns the destination for the host behind the CE Rtr as off-link. Then the Neighbor Cache is looked up - since you said, the Neighbor Cache entry is not nuked, the lookup succeeds and the packet is sent out and also a Destination Cache entry is created." TO "The Prefix List returns the destination for the host behind the CE Rtr as off-link. Then the Default Router List is looked up and that lookup will succeed. Then the Neighbor Cache is looked up - since you said, the Neighbor Cache entry is not nuked, the lookup succeeds and the packet is sent out and also a Destination Cache entry is created." Hemant -----Original Message----- From: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Hemant Singh (shemant) Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 3:33 PM To: Templin, Fred L; Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops.ietf.org Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Fred, For any further discussion, may I suggest using terminology from RFC 4861, otherwise we spend more time to understand each other. I keep saying the problem is temporary (yes, that is a pause in traffic flow) and the problem will be fixed automatically but you send a reply back saying "no the problem is not fixed automatically". Also, my statements are based on what I have been able to understand thus far from your emails - this understanding may not be correct. If you use the team FIB, please define in terms of conceptual data structs defined in RFC 4861. Wes tells me what you refer to as FIB is the Destination Cache. But to me, the FIB is a collection of the Destination Cache, the Prefix List, and the Default Router List. Now we both think that what you call as FIB is the routing table on the SP rtr. Further, I believe what I call as the Neighbor Cache, you refer to it as nbr.=20 Now if a routing table entry is deleted from the SP Rtr, then it is indeed a problem for which routing protocols are required. However, note that the SPs do not want any routing protocols between the CE Rtr and the SP Rtr. So then, really, it's a question of the SP Rtr be designed properly as per SP Rtr quality standards and have its routing table cache be sized appropriately.=20 Please also note, if it's a routing table entry that got nuked, the Conceptual Sending Algorithm of RFC 4861 does not apply to routing of packets by the SP Rtr - the algorithm is applicable only to a host. However, if the SP Rtr sources a packet destined to, say, a host behind the CE Rtr, then the Conceptual Sending Algorithm is legal to use and here is how it would work in your situation. Let's say the Destination Cache has the destination nuked. The Conceptual Sending Algorithm looks up the destination in the Prefix List. The Prefix List returns the destination for the host behind the CE Rtr as off-link. Then the Neighbor Cache is looked up - since you said, the Neighbor Cache entry is not nuked, the lookup succeeds and the packet is sent out and also a Destination Cache entry is created.=20 So again, as per Wes's email, the summary is still that this problem you describe just needs a properly designed SP Rtr. Your problem does not need any changes be made to the CE Rtr draft nor any changes to the ND RFC nor any other RFC. Thanks, Hemant & Wes From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Wed Jan 6 12:51:15 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D5763A6960 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:51:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.196 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.196 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.197, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_23=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kC4LaXnNreJd for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:51:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B20F73A6961 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:51:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NScnF-000IUo-Nj for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 20:47:49 +0000 Received: from [130.76.96.56] (helo=stl-smtpout-01.boeing.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NScn9-000IUJ-9z for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 20:47:43 +0000 Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (blv-av-01.boeing.com [130.247.48.231]) by stl-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/8.14.0/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id o06KlXb8025297 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 14:47:33 -0600 (CST) Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o06KlWVm016381; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:47:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NWHT-02.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwht-02.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.70.248]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o06KlW3F016378 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:47:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.64.97]) by XCH-NWHT-02.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.70.248]) with mapi; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:47:32 -0800 From: "Templin, Fred L" To: "Wes Beebee (wbeebee)" , "Hemant Singh (shemant)" , "Fred Baker (fred)" , "v6ops@ops.ietf.org" CC: "kurtis@kurtis.pp.se" , "rbonica@juniper.net" Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:46:54 -0800 Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Topic: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Index: AcqNWC7D0NSBCdUKTgCgAaETCoD48wAQ+GfgAAtQ+EAAFkkNcAAD5w6QAAjVHBAAIpV00AAEFfTAAAN1lLAAAd+/gA== Message-ID: References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Wes, We are getting closer, but there are still a couple of things to clarify: > -----Original Message----- > From: Wes Beebee (wbeebee) [mailto:wbeebee@cisco.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 11:11 AM > To: Templin, Fred L; Hemant Singh (shemant); Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops= .ietf.org > Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net > Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ie= tf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router- > 03.txt WGLC) >=20 > > Not quite; the OS seems to clear *FIB entries* based on the setting of > the IsRouter flag in the > > neighbor cache entry corresponding to the nexthop. The OS does not > clear entries in the nbr cache. >=20 > From RFC 4861: >=20 > "Router Solicitations in which the Source Address is the unspecified > address MUST NOT update the router's Neighbor Cache; solicitations > with a proper source address update the Neighbor Cache as follows. > ... > Whether or not a Source Link-Layer > Address option is provided, if a Neighbor Cache entry for the > solicitation's sender exists (or is created) the entry's IsRouter > flag MUST be set to FALSE." >=20 > > But, if the CE router subsequently sends an NA message with the R bit > (i.e., the Router bit) set to > > TRUE, the SP router will set IsRouter in the nbr cache entry to TRUE > and the danger of FIB entry > > deletion is averted. >=20 > Well, the CE Router may need to receive an RA in order to know how to do > address acquisition on its WAN interface (doing SLAAC/DHCP, etc.). > Waiting for a periodic RA may not be feasible in some deployments, so a > CE Router MAY send an RS in order to increase the chances of receiving > an RA in a timely manner. We don't want to block CE Routers from ever > sending RS's on their WAN interface. I agree it is very likely that the CE router may need to send a solicitation of some kind in order to receive a more timely RA from the SP router. =20 > Garbage collecting the FIB entries based on IsRouter value in the > Neighbor Cache is not specifically prohibited by RFC 4861 - so we're not > talking about a non-compliance issue. Right. > From RFC 4861: >=20 > "To limit the storage needed for the Destination and Neighbor > Caches, > a node may need to garbage-collect old entries. However, care must > be taken to ensure that sufficient space is always present to hold > the working set of active entries. A small cache may result in an > excessive number of Neighbor Discovery messages if entries are > discarded and rebuilt in quick succession. Any Least Recently Used > (LRU)-based policy that only reclaims entries that have not been > used > in some time (e.g., ten minutes or more) should be adequate for > garbage-collecting unused entries. >=20 > A node should retain entries in the Default Router List and the > Prefix List until their lifetimes expire. However, a node may > garbage-collect entries prematurely if it is low on memory. If not > all routers are kept on the Default Router list, a node should > retain > at least two entries in the Default Router List (and preferably > more) > in order to maintain robust connectivity for off-link > destinations." While this text is fine as quoted from the RFC, it does not really apply to the issue we are discussing. We are concerned with the case of an implementation garbage collecting FIB entries based on the IsRouter setting in the neighbor cache entry for the nexthop. This has nothing to do with memory limitation, LRU, etc. - it is rather based on a policy decision that routes not be allowed to use a non-router as the next hop.=20 =20 > And, sending a gratuitous NA after an RA solely for the purpose of > preventing Linux running on the SP from GC'ing the CE Router entry has > the problems that you've already identified, and seems like a hack: >=20 > > Two problems with this however. First, it requires the CE router to > send a gratuitous NA message. > > Secondly, the CE router has no way of knowing if the SP router has > received the NA message. >=20 > I think the only other options are to say "don't GC if IsRouter is > FALSE" to Linux, which may not be an option if you run out of space, or > make sure that there's enough space that you don't GC more often than > you'd expect traffic from the CE Router to keep the entries alive, which > is already recommended by RFC 4861: >=20 > "However, care must be taken to ensure that sufficient space is > always > present to hold the working set of active entries." Again, this is not a memory limitation consideration; it is a policy consideration. Linux is just one example of an OS that seems to have adopted the policy of not allowing FIB entries that use a non-router as the next hop. We don't know what other implementations there are that might adopt such a policy. > I think we've analyzed the problem fully now. From a specification > standpoint, I don't know what you want us to do. It seems that there needs to be some way to either prevent the SP router from setting the IsRouter flag to FALSE when the CE temporarily acts as a host or to reset the flag to TRUE when the CE begins acting as a router. I'm not sure there is a way to do either of these without involving the SP router.=20 =20 > From a practical > implementation standpoint, I think you know what you're options are. I'm not sure I understand this part. This is an operational consideration for which we see one implementation that may be affected but we have no way of knowing what other implementations could be affected. Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com=20 > - Wes >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Templin, Fred L > Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 12:08 PM > To: Hemant Singh (shemant); Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops.ietf.org > Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net > Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) >=20 > Hemant, >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Hemant Singh (shemant) [mailto:shemant@cisco.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 8:24 AM > > To: Templin, Fred L; Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops.ietf.org > > Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net > > Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: > > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router- 03.txt WGLC) > > > > Fred, > > > > It's a well-known problem in Linux that the OS incorrectly combined > > the Neighbor Cache and the Destination cache causing data forwarding > > failures and incorrect on-link assumptions. This problem you are > > alluding to about the IsRouter is another bug in the Linux code as to > > why the OS has FIB clearing entries in the Neighbor Cache? >=20 > Not quite; the OS seems to clear *FIB entries* based on the setting of > the IsRouter flag in the neighbor cache entry corresponding to the > nexthop. The OS does not clear entries in the nbr cache. >=20 > > The FIB is > > the Prefix List, the Destination Cache, and the Default Router List; > > the FIB should not touch the Neighbor Cache. I do grant you an OS can >=20 > > independently garbage collect entries in the Neighbor Cache and the OS >=20 > > is also not non-compliant for ND if the OS deletes entries in the > > Neighbor Cache with IsRouter flag set to FALSE. Note ND RFC 4861 does >=20 > > not say anything about garbage collecting entries in the Neighbor > > Cache with IsRouter flag set to FALSE. >=20 > No, I am not talking about garbage collecting *nbr cache* entries based > on IsRouter; I am talking about garbage collecting *FIB entries* which > can lead to loss of connectivity. I have said this a number of times > now. > Wes said it in his message, too. >=20 > > Now, when anyone reports a bug to me, I try to ascertain the severity > > of the bug. The issue you raise does not look severe to me, It's a > > temporary problem that can fix itself. >=20 > Fix itself how? Once the FIB entry is gone there would need to be some > protocol for bringing it back and I don't see that specified anywhere. > And, unless the nbr cache entry IsRouter flag gets set to TRUE, the FIB > entry could just be garbage collected all over again resulting in the > same loss of connectivity. >=20 > > If an OS has this garbage > > collection nuance and the Neighbor Cache entry is deleted, when the > > next packet needs to be sent to the node whose entry was deleted in > > the SP rtr, ND address resolution will take place and resolve the > > address causing the Neighbor Cache to be populated again. ND also > > specifies the packet be held in a queue till the packet's destination > > is resolved - so the SP rtr is not likely to drop any packets. >=20 > See above - it is FIB entry deletion and not nbr cache entry deletion > that concerns me. >=20 > > Wes already asked, what if the CE Rtr always sets the IsRouter flag in >=20 > > ND messages where this flag is possible to be set and that should take >=20 > > care of your Linux problem. If the CE Rtr sends an NA, the CE Rtr > > will set the IsRouter flag to TRUE. >=20 > I already said this both in an off-list message and more recently > on-list. If the CE router sends an RS, then the SP router will set > IsRouter in its nbr cache entry for the CE router to FALSE. But, if the > CE router subsequently sends an NA message with the R bit (i.e., the > Router bit) set to TRUE, the SP router will set IsRouter in the nbr > cache entry to TRUE and the danger of FIB entry deletion is averted. >=20 > Two problems with this however. First, it requires the CE router to send > a gratuitous NA message. Secondly, the CE router has no way of knowing > if the SP router has received the NA message. >=20 > > Did we miss anything? >=20 > Yes, but I think I clarified it above? >=20 > Fred > fred.l.templin@boeing.com >=20 > > Thanks, > > > > Hemant From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Wed Jan 6 13:12:03 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 226EA28C15C for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:12:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.468 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.468 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.131, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kZtZ6BYID+Lg for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:12:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BCFA28C13F for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:12:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSd7M-000LVq-5Z for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 21:08:36 +0000 Received: from [130.76.96.56] (helo=stl-smtpout-01.boeing.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSd7D-000LV1-Bc for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 21:08:27 +0000 Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (blv-av-01.boeing.com [130.247.48.231]) by stl-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/8.14.0/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id o06L8Du8012943 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 15:08:14 -0600 (CST) Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o06L8Du9010482; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:08:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NWHT-04.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwht-04.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.64.250]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o06L8CU7010476 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:08:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.64.97]) by XCH-NWHT-04.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.64.250]) with mapi; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:08:13 -0800 From: "Templin, Fred L" To: Ole Troan CC: Fred Baker , "v6ops@ops.ietf.org" , "kurtis@kurtis.pp.se" , "rbonica@juniper.net" Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:07:32 -0800 Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Topic: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Index: AcqPCtDe4B9lF4wtT4Ojsyjzd0IvegABlk0g Message-ID: References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> <2bbba3c11001061159j1b07e5ceq3b56b4ac5f696f33@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <2bbba3c11001061159j1b07e5ceq3b56b4ac5f696f33@mail.gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Ole, > -----Original Message----- > From: ichiroumakino@gmail.com [mailto:ichiroumakino@gmail.com] On Behalf = Of Ole Troan > Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 12:00 PM > To: Templin, Fred L > Cc: Fred Baker; v6ops@ops.ietf.org; kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.= net > Subject: Re: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ie= tf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router- > 03.txt WGLC) >=20 > Fred, >=20 > the IsRouter flag only has value to a host, so that it can detect that > its default router is changing state from a router to a host. in this > scenario which is really a router-to-router link I cannot see any > problem with the service provider end getting the flag wrong. it is > after all not used for anything on a routed interface. Based on what I see in RFC4861, any interface that maintains a neighbor cache (host or router) also manages the IsRouter flag.=20 =20 > if an implementation deletes neighbor entries on a routed interface > based on a change in this flag, then that's a bug. It doesn't delete neighbor entries; it deletes FIB entries (i.e., routes) that have a nexthop with IsRouter set to FALSE. Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com > cheers, > Ole >=20 > On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 2:00 AM, Templin, Fred L > wrote: > > Fred, > > > > A concern I raised on the list a while back centers around > > the behavior of the CPE router acting as a host on its WAN > > interface per section 4.1: > > > > =A0"When the router is attached to the WAN interface link it must act a= s > > =A0 an IPv6 host for the purposes of stateless or stateful interface > > =A0 address assignment ([RFC4862]/[RFC3315])." > > > > and per WPD-3: > > > > =A0"WPD-3: =A0Absent of other routing information the IPv6 CE router MU= ST > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 use Router Discovery as specified in [RFC4861] to d= iscover a > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 default router and install a default route in its r= outing > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 table with the discovered router's address as the n= ext-hop." > > > > To my understanding, this behavior would involve the CPE > > router sending Router Solicitation (RS) messages on its > > WAN interface in order to receive Router Advertisement (RA) > > messages. According to Section 6.2.6 of RFC4861, however: > > > > =A0"Whether or not a Source Link-Layer > > =A0 Address option is provided, if a Neighbor Cache entry for the > > =A0 (RS)'s sender exists (or is created) the entry's IsRouter flag > > =A0 MUST be set to FALSE." > > > > RFC4861 goes to some level of detail to specify the setting > > of the IsRouter flag under various circumstances (including > > the RS case), but it only says what actions should be taken > > based on the flag as result of receiving Neighbor Advertisement > > messages. Other actions based on the IsRouter flag setting do > > not seem to be specified. > > > > In the linux kernel, it appears that the kernel will in some > > circumstances garbage-collect FIB entries that have a nexthop > > with the IsRouter flag set to FALSE. It is not clear what other > > router implementations would do based on the IsRouter setting, > > but it seems odd that the IsRouter flag in neighbor cache > > entries corresponding to CPE routers would be set to FALSE > > which in the linux case at least may lead to interoperability > > issues. > > > > As a result, it might be worth reconsidering whether it is > > appropriate for the CPE router to send an RS which might > > confuse other routers into thinking it is a host. > > > > Fred > > fred.l.templin@boeing.com > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On Be= half Of Fred Baker > >> Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 7:45 AM > >> To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org > >> Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net > >> Subject: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC > >> > >> This is to initiate a two week working group last call of draft-ietf- > >> v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt. Please read it now. If you find nits > >> (spelling errors, minor suggested wording changes, etc), comment to > >> the authors; if you find greater issues, such as disagreeing with a > >> statement or finding additional issues that need to be addressed, > >> please post your comments to the list. > >> > >> We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the > >> document as well as its content. If you have read the document and > >> believe it to be of operational utility, that is also an important > >> comment to make. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Dec 18, 2009, at 2:45 AM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: > >> > >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > >> directories. > >> This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the > >> IETF. > >> > >> > >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Title =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : Basic Requirements for IPv6 Cu= stomer Edge Routers > >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Author(s) =A0 =A0 =A0 : H. Singh, et al. > >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Filename =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router= -03.txt > >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Pages =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : 14 > >> =A0 =A0 =A0 Date =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: 2009-12-18 > >> > >> This document specifies requirements for an IPv6 Customer Edge (CE) > >> router. =A0Specifically, the current version of this document focuses > >> on the provisioning of an IPv6 CE router and the provisioning of IPv6 > >> hosts attached to it. > >> > >> Status of this Memo > >> > >> This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the > >> provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. > >> > >> Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering > >> Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. =A0Note that > >> other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- > >> Drafts. > >> > >> Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months > >> and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any > >> time. =A0It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference > >> material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." > >> > >> The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at > >> http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. > >> > >> The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at > >> http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. > >> > >> This Internet-Draft will expire on June 21, 2010. > >> > >> Copyright Notice > >> > >> Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the > >> document authors. =A0All rights reserved. > >> > >> This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal > >> Provisions Relating to IETF Documents > >> (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of > >> publication of this document. =A0Please review these documents > >> carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect > >> to this document. =A0Code Components extracted from this document must > >> include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of > >> the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as > >> described in the BSD License. > >> > >> A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-0= 3.txt > >> > >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > >> > >> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > >> implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > >> Internet-Draft. > >> _______________________________________________ > >> I-D-Announce mailing list > >> I-D-Announce@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > >> Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html > >> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > >> > >> http://www.ipinc.net/IPv4.GIF > >> > > > > > > From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Wed Jan 6 13:39:37 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29DDE3A6812 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:39:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AuzbEQaS9Du8 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:39:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51B243A67A2 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:39:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSdYE-000P6r-MI for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 21:36:22 +0000 Received: from [64.102.122.148] (helo=rtp-iport-1.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSdY7-000P64-Ra for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 21:36:16 +0000 Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEABqRREutJV2Z/2dsb2JhbAC/apNmhDAE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,231,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="78627129" Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 Jan 2010 21:36:13 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com [72.163.62.138]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o06LaDJP025464; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 21:36:13 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-201.cisco.com ([72.163.62.208]) by xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 15:36:13 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 15:36:10 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Index: AcqNWC7D0NSBCdUKTgCgAaETCoD48wAQ+GfgAAtQ+EAAFkkNcAAD5w6QAAjVHBAAIpV00AAEFfTAAAW1mPAAAoNAQAABZw5g References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> From: "Wes Beebee (wbeebee)" To: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" , "Templin, Fred L" , "Fred Baker (fred)" , Cc: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jan 2010 21:36:13.0582 (UTC) FILETIME=[452992E0:01CA8F18] Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: > Again, this is not a memory limitation consideration; it is a policy consideration.=20 OK - I finally understand where you're coming from. Consider the following scenario: 1) A CE Router is connected via a link to a SP Router, and sends a DHCPv6 SOLICIT with IA_PD. 2) An evil host running Dibbler sends a DHCPv6 SOLICIT with an IA_PD option that SP router gleans. 3) SP router populates routing table with IA_PD from both boxes. 4) Traffic is sent to both the CE Router and the evil host destined for PC's behind the CE Router and the evil host. 5) The evil host should NOT be receiving this traffic since it is not a router. Therefore, a policy was enacted to use the IsRouter flag to determine whether the box is the CE Router or the evil host. The evil host is rejected by garbage collection (the policy). Unfortunately, the CE Router is also rejected by the policy, since the Neighbor Cache entry in the SP Router says that the CE Router IsRouter flag is FALSE. The policy is understandable from a security perspective. However, the primitive used to implement the policy (IsRouter) is too weak to do the job. There are two solutions to this problem. 1) Make IsRouter a stronger primitive that would be up to the job. 2) Use a different primitive which is stronger to implement the policy. #1 is very difficult and may have serious repercussions to the ND specification and other implementations and may not be feasible. I suggest you start with #2. Some primitives that may help (which have other problems) include routing protocols, secure ND, DHCPv6 gleaning by the SP Router, or a combination of the three. =20 If these primitives are insufficient for your needs, you can consider doing additional protocol work outside of the tools available in RFC 4861. - Wes and Hemant From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Wed Jan 6 13:44:44 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D2C43A682B for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:44:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.484 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.484 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.115, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kQkYE+lxNnfg for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:44:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D1973A6767 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:44:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSdd5-000Pi3-4s for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 21:41:23 +0000 Received: from [130.76.32.69] (helo=blv-smtpout-01.boeing.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSdcn-000Ph4-LZ for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 21:41:05 +0000 Received: from slb-av-01.boeing.com (slb-av-01.boeing.com [129.172.13.4]) by blv-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/8.14.0/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id o06Lf0X4009501 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:41:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from slb-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by slb-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o06LexAo000931; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:40:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NWHT-10.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwht-10.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.25.113]) by slb-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o06LextW000917 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:40:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.64.97]) by XCH-NWHT-10.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.25.113]) with mapi; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:40:59 -0800 From: "Templin, Fred L" To: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" , "Fred Baker (fred)" , "v6ops@ops.ietf.org" CC: "kurtis@kurtis.pp.se" , "rbonica@juniper.net" Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:40:16 -0800 Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Topic: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Index: AcqNWC7D0NSBCdUKTgCgAaETCoD48wAQ+GfgAAtQ+EAAFkkNcAAD5w6QAAjVHBAAIpV00AAEFfTAAAW1mPAAA2QkwA== Message-ID: References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hemant, > -----Original Message----- > From: Hemant Singh (shemant) [mailto:shemant@cisco.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 12:33 PM > To: Templin, Fred L; Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops.ietf.org > Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net > Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ie= tf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router- > 03.txt WGLC) >=20 > Fred, >=20 > For any further discussion, may I suggest using terminology from RFC > 4861, otherwise we spend more time to understand each other. I keep > saying the problem is temporary (yes, that is a pause in traffic flow) > and the problem will be fixed automatically but you send a reply back > saying "no the problem is not fixed automatically". Also, my statements > are based on what I have been able to understand thus far from your > emails - this understanding may not be correct. If you use the team > FIB, please define in terms of conceptual data structs defined in RFC > 4861. Wes tells me what you refer to as FIB is the Destination Cache. > But to me, the FIB is a collection of the Destination Cache, the Prefix > List, and the Default Router List. Now we both think that what you call > as FIB is the routing table on the SP rtr. Yes; I am referring to the routing table on the SP rtr; the linux kernel calls this the FIB. > Further, I believe what I > call as the Neighbor Cache, you refer to it as nbr. Almost - in the terminology I have used: nbr cache =3D=3D Neighbor Cache nbr =3D Neighbor Cache Entry I will try to stick as close as possible to RFC4861 terminology from now on. > Now if a routing table entry is deleted from the SP Rtr, then it is > indeed a problem for which routing protocols are required. However, > note that the SPs do not want any routing protocols between the CE Rtr > and the SP Rtr. Yes, I understand that there are to be no routing protocols between the CE and SP routers. > So then, really, it's a question of the SP Rtr be > designed properly as per SP Rtr quality standards Where are those standards specified? And, do they say that the SP router should ignore the IsRouter flag? > and have its routing > table cache be sized appropriately. Size is not the issue; policy is the issue. > Please also note, if it's a routing table entry that got nuked, the > Conceptual Sending Algorithm of RFC 4861 does not apply to routing of > packets by the SP Rtr - the algorithm is applicable only to a host. I'm not concerned about the Conceptual Sending Algorithm of a host. I am concerned about what happens when the SP router needs to forward a packet to a host behind a CE router, but there is no route because the route was removed due to the SP router thinking the CE router is a host. > However, if the SP Rtr sources a packet destined to, say, a host behind > the CE Rtr, then the Conceptual Sending Algorithm is legal to use and > here is how it would work in your situation. Let's say the Destination > Cache has the destination nuked. The Conceptual Sending Algorithm looks > up the destination in the Prefix List. The Prefix List returns the > destination for the host behind the CE Rtr as off-link. Then the > Neighbor Cache is looked up - since you said, the Neighbor Cache entry > is not nuked, the lookup succeeds and the packet is sent out and also a > Destination Cache entry is created. I saw your correction for this section, but this is not the issue that concerns me. The issue that concerns me is what happens if the SP router needs to forward a packet to a host behind a CE router, but it doesn't have a route because it mistakenly believes the CE router is a host. > So again, as per Wes's email, the summary is still that this problem you > describe just needs a properly designed SP Rtr. Your problem does not > need any changes be made to the CE Rtr draft nor any changes to the ND > RFC nor any other RFC. Somewhere it needs to be said that what you are calling a "properly designed SP Rtr" needs to ignore the IsRouter flag and not garbage-collect routes if IsRouter is FALSE. Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com > Thanks, >=20 > Hemant & Wes >=20 From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Wed Jan 6 14:07:35 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49E473A6804 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 14:07:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.497 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.497 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.102, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Lv2TFi7gJkO6 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 14:07:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75DDA3A67D9 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 14:07:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSe0Q-0003GC-En for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 22:05:30 +0000 Received: from [130.76.32.69] (helo=blv-smtpout-01.boeing.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSe0J-0003Fw-UZ for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 22:05:24 +0000 Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (blv-av-01.boeing.com [130.247.48.231]) by blv-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/8.14.0/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id o06M53QX028209 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 14:05:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o06M52nH001274; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 14:05:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NWHT-08.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwht-08.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.25.112]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o06M51bQ001126 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 14:05:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.64.97]) by XCH-NWHT-08.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.25.112]) with mapi; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 14:05:01 -0800 From: "Templin, Fred L" To: "Wes Beebee (wbeebee)" , "Hemant Singh (shemant)" , "Fred Baker (fred)" , "v6ops@ops.ietf.org" CC: "kurtis@kurtis.pp.se" , "rbonica@juniper.net" Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 14:04:16 -0800 Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Topic: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Index: AcqNWC7D0NSBCdUKTgCgAaETCoD48wAQ+GfgAAtQ+EAAFkkNcAAD5w6QAAjVHBAAIpV00AAEFfTAAAW1mPAAAoNAQAABZw5gAAEFm0A= Message-ID: References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Wes, > -----Original Message----- > From: Wes Beebee (wbeebee) [mailto:wbeebee@cisco.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 1:36 PM > To: Hemant Singh (shemant); Templin, Fred L; Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops= .ietf.org > Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net > Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ie= tf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router- > 03.txt WGLC) >=20 > > Again, this is not a memory limitation consideration; it is a policy > consideration. >=20 > OK - I finally understand where you're coming from. Consider the > following scenario: >=20 > 1) A CE Router is connected via a link to a SP Router, and sends a > DHCPv6 SOLICIT with IA_PD. > 2) An evil host running Dibbler sends a DHCPv6 SOLICIT with an IA_PD > option that SP router gleans. > 3) SP router populates routing table with IA_PD from both boxes. > 4) Traffic is sent to both the CE Router and the evil host destined for > PC's behind the CE Router and the evil host. > 5) The evil host should NOT be receiving this traffic since it is not a > router. >=20 > Therefore, a policy was enacted to use the IsRouter flag to determine > whether the box is the CE Router or the evil host. The evil host is > rejected by garbage collection (the policy). Unfortunately, the CE > Router is also rejected by the policy, since the Neighbor Cache entry in > the SP Router says that the CE Router IsRouter flag is FALSE. >=20 > The policy is understandable from a security perspective. However, the > primitive used to implement the policy (IsRouter) is too weak to do the > job. I don't know if it would be productive to try to guess at what policy decisions the endless array of router implementations would observe, but I know of at least one implementation that takes heed of the IsRouter flag when considering whether a route should be deleted. > There are two solutions to this problem. >=20 > 1) Make IsRouter a stronger primitive that would be up to the job. > 2) Use a different primitive which is stronger to implement the policy. >=20 > #1 is very difficult and may have serious repercussions to the ND > specification and other implementations and may not be feasible. >=20 > I suggest you start with #2. Some primitives that may help (which have > other problems) include routing protocols, secure ND, DHCPv6 gleaning by > the SP Router, or a combination of the three. >=20 > If these primitives are insufficient for your needs, you can consider > doing additional protocol work outside of the tools available in RFC > 4861. Maybe so, but lacking a spec I don't think it would be productive to try to guess whether all router implementations observe the same policies wrt the IsRouter flag. Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com > - Wes and Hemant From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Wed Jan 6 17:16:56 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4233B3A696E for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 17:16:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TvCb1ktPVs0P for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 17:16:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B63E3A6967 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 17:16:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSgyq-000P7V-KP for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 01:16:04 +0000 Received: from [17.254.13.23] (helo=mail-out4.apple.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSgyk-000P6x-SU for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 01:15:58 +0000 Received: from relay11.apple.com (relay11.apple.com [17.128.113.48]) by mail-out4.apple.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 096AD85536B5 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 17:15:58 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: 11807130-b7b0aae00000102c-6a-4b4535cdb811 Received: from il0602a-dhcp117.apple.com (il0602a-dhcp117.apple.com [17.206.23.245]) (using TLS with cipher AES128-SHA (AES128-SHA/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by relay11.apple.com (Apple SCV relay) with SMTP id A8.AE.04140.DC5354B4; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 17:15:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: james woodyatt In-Reply-To: <94A05B7E-28B2-4BB5-891C-BDD91B23FDE5@apple.com> Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 17:15:57 -0800 Cc: IPv6 Operations Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <01776745-CBBC-4058-82B7-F1EED862E988@apple.com> References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> <94A05B7E-28B2-4BB5-891C-BDD91B23FDE5@apple.com> To: james woodyatt X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAZE= Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Jan 5, 2010, at 10:53, james woodyatt wrote: >=20 > I'm inclined to think we should take the Route Information Option from = RFC 4191 and define a way to add it to the Neighbor Advertisement = message. Well, this was an embarrassingly dumb thing for me to have written, and = after a brief coffee break, I decided I should come forward and admit = it. Forget I wrote this. Not smart. Ooops. -- james woodyatt member of technical staff, communications engineering From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Wed Jan 6 17:17:15 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1CA33A6971 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 17:17:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mtxg7VsyuB0g for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 17:17:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D96C328C102 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 17:17:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSgs6-000O7h-V4 for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 01:09:06 +0000 Received: from [216.82.241.147] (helo=mail146.messagelabs.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSgs1-000O7A-01 for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 01:09:01 +0000 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: bs7652@att.com X-Msg-Ref: server-5.tower-146.messagelabs.com!1262826536!25532264!1 X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.4; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [144.160.20.146] Received: (qmail 5116 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2010 01:08:57 -0000 Received: from sbcsmtp7.sbc.com (HELO mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com) (144.160.20.146) by server-5.tower-146.messagelabs.com with DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 7 Jan 2010 01:08:57 -0000 Received: from enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o0718rED028074; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 20:08:53 -0500 Received: from 01GAF5142010622.AD.BLS.COM (01GAF5142010622.ad.bls.com [139.76.131.83]) by mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with SMTP id o0718mQ5028048; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 20:08:48 -0500 Received: from 01NC27689010625.AD.BLS.COM ([90.144.44.200]) by 01GAF5142010622.AD.BLS.COM with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 20:08:51 -0500 Received: from 01NC27689010641.AD.BLS.COM ([90.144.44.103]) by 01NC27689010625.AD.BLS.COM with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 20:08:51 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4325 Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 20:08:49 -0500 Message-ID: <7582BC68E4994F4ABF0BD4723975C3FA118E803E@crexc41p> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) thread-index: AcqNWC7D0NSBCdUKTgCgAaETCoD48wAQ+GfgAAtQ+EAAFkkNcAAD5w6QAAjVHBAAIpV00AAEFfTAAAW1mPAAA2QkwAAHROoA References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> From: "STARK, BARBARA H (ATTLABS)" To: "Templin, Fred L" , "Hemant Singh (shemant)" , "Fred Baker (fred)" , CC: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Jan 2010 01:08:51.0047 (UTC) FILETIME=[F9343F70:01CA8F35] Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: > > So then, really, it's a question of the SP Rtr be > > designed properly as per SP Rtr quality standards >=20 > Where are those standards specified? And, do they say > that the SP router should ignore the IsRouter flag? Telcos will create the SP Router standards in the BBF, more than likely. I wouldn't be surprised if CableLabs did standards for the cable companies, but I have no direct knowledge of that. My guess is that the BBF standards won't even mention the IsRouter flag. There will be no NS or RS messages sent to CE routers (or hosts). So there will be no solicited NA or RA messages coming from the CE routers. The current requirement for CE routers supplied by BBF SPs is that they will never send RA messages out the WAN interface, solicited or unsolicited (WAN interface is not an advertising interface). No mention has been made of unsolicited NA messages, so far. This is probably because no-one realistically expects to see unsolicited NA messages. If people are thinking about really implementing unsolicited NA, then I think it may be necessary to say that they're undesirable. I think that Wes and Hemant are correct in assuming that this IsRouter flag thing will be a non-issue in SP Routers. Barbara ***** The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to = which it is addressed and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or = privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other = use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by = persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If = you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the = material from all computers. GA622 From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Thu Jan 7 03:02:58 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D2BE3A6895 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 03:02:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qj7V0eh+xseh for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 03:02:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DAE43A6835 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 03:02:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSq0v-000LvU-NM for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 10:54:49 +0000 Received: from [144.254.224.141] (helo=ams-iport-2.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSq0n-000LtY-D6 for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 10:54:41 +0000 Authentication-Results: ams-iport-2.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,234,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="2230876" Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com ([144.254.224.150]) by ams-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Jan 2010 10:26:11 +0000 Received: from ams-otroan-8718.cisco.com (ams-otroan-8718.cisco.com [10.55.160.153]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o07AsdqC012703; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 10:54:39 GMT Subject: Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ole Troan In-Reply-To: <048501ca8e39$65613570$c5f0200a@cisco.com> Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 11:53:52 +0100 Cc: "'Fred Baker'" , , , , Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <6F8489CE-0A1F-40FD-8D99-1BCC303A2556@cisco.com> References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> <048501ca8e39$65613570$c5f0200a@cisco.com> To: Dan Wing X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Dan, thanks for extensive comments! [removed DNS comment. as I have nothing to add. I'd really like a = consensus coming out of v6ops/behave for any new or different CPE = requirements] > Section 3.1 should additionally mention that an end-network > IPv4 CPE that incorporates a NAT also incorporates a DHCPv4=20 > server. The inclusion of a DHCP server in the CPE is implied,=20 > but should be explicitly stated. The DHCP server in the CPE=20 > allows the in-home network to be self-sufficient (for IP=20 > addressing, if not naming). >=20 > This is relevant to IPv6 because, I have been told, ULAs > provide a similar "LAN only" address. This should be > mentioned or a pointer to how hosts inside the home should > use ULAs mentioned. We do not want streaming between an > in-home NAS and an in-home television to rely on the > WAN link's availability. This is mentioned (insufficiently) > in Section 4.2 and some of the L-* requirements. agree. added your proposed text in section 3.1 > The definition of Service Provider is "a company that ...", > which precludes non-companies such as, for example, a University=20 > offering service to students in University housing. Is that = intentional? an entity that provides access to the Internet. In this document, a Service Provider specifically offers Internet access using IPv6, and may also offer IPv4 Internet access. The Service Provider can provide such access over a variety of different transport methods such as DSL, cable, wireless, and others. is the above text any better? "entity" is quite fluffy, but what can you = do... > Many of the enumerated requirements contain multiple "MUSTs" or = "SHOULDs". > This makes things complicated, because a vendor (or a customer) cannot = say, > for example, "we comply with all of RFCxyz, except L-5" because L-5 = contains > three MUSTs and one SHOULD. Taking L-5 as an example, I suggest = changing > from: >=20 > OLD: > L-5: The IPv6 CE router MUST assign a separate /64 from its > delegated prefix (and ULA prefix if configured to provide ULA > addressing) for each of its LAN interfaces. The IPV6 CE > router MUST make the interface an advertising interface > according to [RFC4861]. In router advertisements messages, > the Prefix Information Option's A/L-bits MUST be set to 1 by > default; the A/L bits setting SHOULD be user configurable. > NEW: > L-5: a. The IPv6 CE router MUST assign a separate /64 from its=20 > delegated prefix (and ULA prefix if configured to=20 > provide ULA addressing) for each of its LAN interfaces. > b. The IPV6 CE router MUST make the interface an advertising=20= > interface according to [RFC4861]. =20 > c. In router advertisements messages, the Prefix Information=20= > Option's A/L-bits MUST be set to 1 by default;=20 > d. the A/L bits setting SHOULD be user configurable. >=20 >=20 > This would allow a vendor (or a customer) to say "we comply with all = of > RFCxyz, except L-5c and L5-d". I agree with this suggestion. Best regards, Ole From vaa27223@ietf.org Thu Jan 7 03:03:36 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E15613A67E7 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 03:03:36 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 03:03:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from agora.bungi.com (unknown [190.189.149.126]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 3C8033A6835 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 03:03:22 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: User v6ops-archive@ietf.org get 89 discount on ALL Brands To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100107110327.3C8033A6835@core3.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 03:03:22 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 44008 Inc. All rights reserved.

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Thu Jan 7 05:01:55 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D69B73A68A5 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 05:01:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -32.589 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-32.589 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, HELO_EQ_AT=0.424, HOST_EQ_AT=0.745, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.552, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FopxYQgcJ2aa for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 05:01:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from chello084112090172.38.11.vie.surfer.at (chello084112090172.38.11.vie.surfer.at [84.112.90.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ACB53A6835 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 05:01:53 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100107130153.6ACB53A6835@core3.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 05:01:53 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 KUJUE. All rights reserved.
From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Thu Jan 7 05:02:12 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9E8B3A676A for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 05:02:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -32.588 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-32.588 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, HELO_EQ_AT=0.424, HOST_EQ_AT=0.745, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.552, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, NUMERIC_HTTP_ADDR=0.001, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KRNya0wNQDGG for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 05:02:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from chello084112090172.38.11.vie.surfer.at (chello084112090172.38.11.vie.surfer.at [84.112.90.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 621823A687F for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 05:02:10 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100107130210.621823A687F@core3.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 05:02:10 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 OYTYN. All rights reserved.
From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Thu Jan 7 05:02:21 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9D123A6810 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 05:02:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -32.589 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-32.589 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, HELO_EQ_AT=0.424, HOST_EQ_AT=0.745, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.552, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JboyoQoZti26 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 05:02:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from chello084112090172.38.11.vie.surfer.at (chello084112090172.38.11.vie.surfer.at [84.112.90.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F3933A676A for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 05:02:19 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100107130219.8F3933A676A@core3.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 05:02:19 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 OVEIKOGEE. All rights reserved.
From electoratesf844@shayarat-ad-durr.de Thu Jan 7 08:19:09 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A41528B23E; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 08:19:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -25.262 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-25.262 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_BR=0.955, HOST_EQ_BR=1.295, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_72=0.6, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SPOOF_NET2COM=1.586, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100, XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_3AC1D=0.688] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yTWxrrAsFW-q; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 08:19:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from 200-219-66-135.ggs6102.3g.brasiltelecom.net.br (200-219-66-135.ggs6102.3g.brasiltelecom.net.br [200.219.66.135]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74A693A68C4; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 08:19:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from 200.219.66.135 by mx2.kontent.com; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 12:18:53 -0400 Message-ID: <000d01ca8fb5$1ab7dbf0$6400a8c0@electoratesf844> From: "notifications@ietf.org" To: Subject: A new settings file for the v6ops-archive@ietf.org Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 12:18:53 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA8FB5.1AB7DBF0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA8FB5.1AB7DBF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear user of the ietf.org mailing service!We are informing you that because= of the security upgrade of the mailing service your mailbox (v6ops-archive= @ietf.org) settings were changed. In order to apply the new set of settings= click on the following link:http://ietf.org/owa/service_directory/settings= php?email=3Dv6ops-archive@ietf.org&from=3Dietf.org&fromname=3Dv6ops-archiv= eBest regards, ietf.org Technical Support.Letter-ID#267ONF5O557R4VZC1CNM9CM= 0 ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA8FB5.1AB7DBF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear user of= the ietf.org mailing service!

We are informing you that because of = the security upgrade of the mailing service your mailbox (v6ops-archive@ietf.org) settings were changed.= In order to apply the new set of settings click on the following link:
=
http://ietf.org/owa/service_directory/settings.php?emai= l=3Dv6ops-archive@ietf.org&from=3Dietf.org&fromname=3Dv6ops-archive<= /a>

Best regards, ietf.org Technical Support.

Letter-ID#267ON= F5O557R4VZC1CNM9CM0

------=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA8FB5.1AB7DBF0-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Thu Jan 7 08:36:57 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 243BB3A689A for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 08:36:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -107.993 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-107.993 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.394, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rQ0yaCfWmWpm for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 08:36:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43E623A6809 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 08:36:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSvEL-000Etr-TA for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 16:29:01 +0000 Received: from [171.71.176.72] (helo=sj-iport-3.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSvEB-000Eqj-Sw for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 16:28:51 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-3.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,236,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="206715131" Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.223.137]) by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Jan 2010 16:28:50 +0000 Received: from dwingwxp01 ([10.32.240.197]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o07GSo1I016459; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 16:28:50 GMT From: "Dan Wing" To: "'Ole Troan'" Cc: "'Fred Baker'" , , , , References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> <048501ca8e39$65613570$c5f0200a@cisco.com> <6F8489CE-0A1F-40FD-8D99-1BCC303A2556@cisco.com> Subject: RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 08:28:51 -0800 Message-ID: <0c8601ca8fb6$7faffbe0$c5f0200a@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <6F8489CE-0A1F-40FD-8D99-1BCC303A2556@cisco.com> Thread-Index: AcqPh9A1UfYlqnr9RYaEzWTmf4rEdQALp8Fg X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Ole Troan [mailto:ot@cisco.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 2:54 AM > To: Dan Wing > Cc: 'Fred Baker'; v6ops@ops.ietf.org; kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; > rbonica@juniper.net; draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router@tools.ietf.org > Subject: Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC > > Dan, > > thanks for extensive comments! > > [removed DNS comment. as I have nothing to add. I'd really > like a consensus coming out of v6ops/behave for any new or > different CPE requirements] > > > Section 3.1 should additionally mention that an end-network > > IPv4 CPE that incorporates a NAT also incorporates a DHCPv4 > > server. The inclusion of a DHCP server in the CPE is implied, > > but should be explicitly stated. The DHCP server in the CPE > > allows the in-home network to be self-sufficient (for IP > > addressing, if not naming). > > > > This is relevant to IPv6 because, I have been told, ULAs > > provide a similar "LAN only" address. This should be > > mentioned or a pointer to how hosts inside the home should > > use ULAs mentioned. We do not want streaming between an > > in-home NAS and an in-home television to rely on the > > WAN link's availability. This is mentioned (insufficiently) > > in Section 4.2 and some of the L-* requirements. > > agree. added your proposed text in section 3.1 > > > The definition of Service Provider is "a company that ...", > > which precludes non-companies such as, for example, a University > > offering service to students in University housing. Is > that intentional? > > an entity that provides > access to the Internet. In this document, a Service Provider > specifically offers Internet access using IPv6, and may also > offer IPv4 Internet access. The Service Provider can provide > such access over a variety of different transport methods > such as DSL, cable, wireless, and others. > > is the above text any better? "entity" is quite fluffy, but > what can you do... Works for me. Thanks. > > Many of the enumerated requirements contain multiple > "MUSTs" or "SHOULDs". > > This makes things complicated, because a vendor (or a > customer) cannot say, > > for example, "we comply with all of RFCxyz, except L-5" > because L-5 contains > > three MUSTs and one SHOULD. Taking L-5 as an example, I > suggest changing > > from: > > > > OLD: > > L-5: The IPv6 CE router MUST assign a separate /64 from its > > delegated prefix (and ULA prefix if configured to > provide ULA > > addressing) for each of its LAN interfaces. The IPV6 CE > > router MUST make the interface an advertising interface > > according to [RFC4861]. In router advertisements messages, > > the Prefix Information Option's A/L-bits MUST be > set to 1 by > > default; the A/L bits setting SHOULD be user configurable. > > NEW: > > L-5: a. The IPv6 CE router MUST assign a separate /64 from its > > delegated prefix (and ULA prefix if configured to > > provide ULA addressing) for each of its LAN interfaces. > > b. The IPV6 CE router MUST make the interface an > advertising > > interface according to [RFC4861]. > > c. In router advertisements messages, the Prefix > Information > > Option's A/L-bits MUST be set to 1 by default; > > d. the A/L bits setting SHOULD be user configurable. > > > > > > This would allow a vendor (or a customer) to say "we comply > with all of > > RFCxyz, except L-5c and L5-d". > > > I agree with this suggestion. -d From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Thu Jan 7 08:55:05 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 138783A6809 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 08:55:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dbTFploBDDAd for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 08:55:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AE1A3A63C9 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 08:55:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSvZ3-000I9Z-K5 for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 16:50:25 +0000 Received: from [192.160.73.61] (helo=ondar.cablelabs.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSvYx-000I92-Bf for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 16:50:19 +0000 Received: from kyzyl.cablelabs.com (kyzyl [10.253.0.7]) by ondar.cablelabs.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with SMTP id o07Go0Bx028130; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 09:50:00 -0700 Received: from srvxchg3.cablelabs.com (10.5.0.25) by kyzyl.cablelabs.com (F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/303/kyzyl.cablelabs.com); Thu, 7 Jan 2010 09:50:00 -0700 (MST) X-Virus-Status: clean(F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/303/kyzyl.cablelabs.com) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 09:50:00 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <7582BC68E4994F4ABF0BD4723975C3FA118E803E@crexc41p> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Index: AcqNWC7D0NSBCdUKTgCgAaETCoD48wAQ+GfgAAtQ+EAAFkkNcAAD5w6QAAjVHBAAIpV00AAEFfTAAAW1mPAAA2QkwAAHROoAACGWYyA= References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> <7582BC68E4994F4ABF0BD4723975C3FA118E803E@crexc41p> From: "Chris Donley" To: "STARK, BARBARA H (ATTLABS)" , "Templin, Fred L" , "Hemant Singh (shemant)" , "Fred Baker (fred)" , Cc: , X-Approved: ondar Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Barbara is correct - CableLabs includes some router requirements in our DOCSIS 3.0 specifications, and we do not mention the IsRouter flag. We will support a number of different routed network topologies (e.g. router embedded in a cable modem or standalone router), and have specified different policy enforcement mechanisms (not IsRouter) to determine which devices should receive prefix delegations and which traffic should be filtered. Chris -----Original Message----- From: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of STARK, BARBARA H (ATTLABS) Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 6:09 PM To: Templin, Fred L; Hemant Singh (shemant); Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops.ietf.org Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) > > So then, really, it's a question of the SP Rtr be > > designed properly as per SP Rtr quality standards >=20 > Where are those standards specified? And, do they say > that the SP router should ignore the IsRouter flag? Telcos will create the SP Router standards in the BBF, more than likely. I wouldn't be surprised if CableLabs did standards for the cable companies, but I have no direct knowledge of that. My guess is that the BBF standards won't even mention the IsRouter flag. There will be no NS or RS messages sent to CE routers (or hosts). So there will be no solicited NA or RA messages coming from the CE routers. The current requirement for CE routers supplied by BBF SPs is that they will never send RA messages out the WAN interface, solicited or unsolicited (WAN interface is not an advertising interface). No mention has been made of unsolicited NA messages, so far. This is probably because no-one realistically expects to see unsolicited NA messages. If people are thinking about really implementing unsolicited NA, then I think it may be necessary to say that they're undesirable. I think that Wes and Hemant are correct in assuming that this IsRouter flag thing will be a non-issue in SP Routers. Barbara ***** The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from all computers. GA622 From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Thu Jan 7 10:31:44 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22E773A6908 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 10:31:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.562 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.562 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.038, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id I5Tg334hrKIJ for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 10:31:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A9CB3A68FB for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 10:31:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSx3e-0008qk-1i for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 18:26:06 +0000 Received: from [64.102.122.149] (helo=rtp-iport-2.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NSx3X-0008qH-SY for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2010 18:26:00 +0000 Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-2.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAEK2RUutJV2d/2dsb2JhbADBGJQAhDAE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,236,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="78919538" Received: from rcdn-core-6.cisco.com ([173.37.93.157]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Jan 2010 18:25:58 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com [72.163.62.200]) by rcdn-core-6.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o07IPwwG018529; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 18:25:58 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-114.cisco.com ([72.163.62.156]) by xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 7 Jan 2010 12:25:58 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 12:25:56 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <7582BC68E4994F4ABF0BD4723975C3FA118E803E@crexc41p> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Index: AcqNWC7D0NSBCdUKTgCgAaETCoD48wAQ+GfgAAtQ+EAAFkkNcAAD5w6QAAjVHBAAIpV00AAEFfTAAAW1mPAAA2QkwAAHROoAABlZTkA= References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> <7582BC68E4994F4ABF0BD4723975C3FA118E803E@crexc41p> From: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" To: "STARK, BARBARA H (ATTLABS)" , "Templin, Fred L" , "Fred Baker (fred)" , Cc: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Jan 2010 18:25:58.0430 (UTC) FILETIME=[DB9D5BE0:01CA8FC6] Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: >-----Original Message----- >From: STARK, BARBARA H (ATTLABS) [mailto:bs7652@att.com]=20 >Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 8:09 PM >To: Templin, Fred L; Hemant Singh (shemant); Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ops.ietf.org >Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se; rbonica@juniper.net >Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) >Telcos will create the SP Router standards in the BBF, more than likely. >I wouldn't be surprised if CableLabs did standards for the cable >companies, but I have no direct knowledge of that.=20 That is correct. CableLabs has defined the standards for the IPv6 Cable Router in their network with no mention of the IsRouter flag. >My guess is that the BBF standards won't even mention the IsRouter flag. There will be no NS >or RS messages sent to CE routers (or hosts).=20 Hmm, why won't a SP Rtr send an NS to the CE Rtr? For one, the SP Rtr can send an NS to resolve the link-local or global of the WAN interface of the CE Rtr. >So there will be no solicited NA or RA messages coming from the CE routers.=20 The CE Rtr can send an NA in response to the NS I mentioned above. Hemant From hollering32@solution-factory.de Thu Jan 7 16:08:21 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A14D23A672F; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 16:08:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -18.487 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-18.487 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_72=0.6, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SPOOF_NET2COM=1.586, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_PH_SURBL=1.787, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dBGOo9C2iVd0; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 16:08:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from cpc7-newt30-2-0-cust1.newt.cable.virginmedia.com (cpc7-newt30-2-0-cust1.newt.cable.virginmedia.com [94.169.198.2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77CB93A68D6; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 16:08:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from 94.169.198.2 by mail.atnet-websolutions.de; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 00:08:14 +0000 Message-ID: <000d01ca8ff6$ac240910$6400a8c0@hollering32> From: "alerts@ietf.org" To: Subject: For the owner of the xmldsig-archive@ietf.org e-mail account Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 00:08:14 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA8FF6.AC240910" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA8FF6.AC240910 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear user of the ietf.org mailing service!We are informing you that because= of the security upgrade of the mailing service your mailbox (xmldsig-archi= ve@ietf.org) settings were changed. In order to apply the new set of settin= gs click on the following link:http://ietf.org/owa/service_directory/settin= gs.php?email=3Dxmldsig-archive@ietf.org&from=3Dietf.org&fromname=3Dxmldsig-= archiveBest regards, ietf.org Technical Support.Letter-ID#GNDY6P4R6ZPXUK ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA8FF6.AC240910 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear user of the ietf.o= rg mailing service!

We are informing you that because of the securit= y upgrade of the mailing service your mailbox (xmldsig-archive@ietf.org) settings were changed. In ord= er to apply the new set of settings click on the following link:

= http://ietf.org/owa/service_directory/settings.php?email=3D= xmldsig-archive@ietf.org&from=3Dietf.org&fromname=3Dxmldsig-archive<= /a>

Best regards, ietf.org Technical Support.

Letter-ID#GNDY6= P4R6ZPXUK

------=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA8FF6.AC240910-- From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Thu Jan 7 18:47:40 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE4D53A692E for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 18:47:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -50.86 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-50.86 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_95=3, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_DYNAMIC_SPLIT_IP=3.493, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.552, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_BLACK=20, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LDWyM5ecqzVA for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 18:47:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from 65.171-136-217.adsl-static.isp.belgacom.be (65.171-136-217.adsl-static.isp.belgacom.be [217.136.171.65]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A98923A692A for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 18:47:33 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100108024733.A98923A692A@core3.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 18:47:33 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 XEZEMI. All rights reserved.
From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Thu Jan 7 18:47:42 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7573D3A692A for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 18:47:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -50.36 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-50.36 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_DYNAMIC_SPLIT_IP=3.493, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.552, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_BLACK=20, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MJVnXxeDUhIN for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 18:47:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from 65.171-136-217.adsl-static.isp.belgacom.be (65.171-136-217.adsl-static.isp.belgacom.be [217.136.171.65]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60CD63A691B for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 18:47:40 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100108024740.60CD63A691B@core3.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 18:47:40 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 EWACE. All rights reserved.
From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Thu Jan 7 18:47:51 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13E903A692A for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 18:47:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -50.36 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-50.36 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_DYNAMIC_SPLIT_IP=3.493, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.552, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_BLACK=20, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8fZTBgUjLodl for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 18:47:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from 65.171-136-217.adsl-static.isp.belgacom.be (65.171-136-217.adsl-static.isp.belgacom.be [217.136.171.65]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9E783A691B for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 18:47:44 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100108024744.C9E783A691B@core3.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 18:47:44 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 MYFOZAN. All rights reserved.
From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Fri Jan 8 01:01:19 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BD5E3A6821 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 01:01:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -86.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-86.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HELO_EQ_PL=1.135, HOST_EQ_PL=1.95, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SLioZpqB7yso for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 01:01:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from gsj162.internetdsl.tpnet.pl (gsj162.internetdsl.tpnet.pl [83.3.217.162]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CA493A685B for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 01:01:11 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100108090112.1CA493A685B@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 01:01:11 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Iciuo Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 01:01:57 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04BD63A67DB for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 01:01:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -83.501 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-83.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HELO_EQ_PL=1.135, HOST_EQ_PL=1.95, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id skTZs7KBLxLK for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 01:01:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from gsj162.internetdsl.tpnet.pl (gsj162.internetdsl.tpnet.pl [83.3.217.162]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A7693A635F for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 01:01:49 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100108090149.6A7693A635F@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 01:01:49 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Jamocepowaev Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 01:02:27 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C15F3A67DB for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 01:02:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -83.501 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-83.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HELO_EQ_PL=1.135, HOST_EQ_PL=1.95, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 86DBr2uuDtzl for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 01:02:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from gsj162.internetdsl.tpnet.pl (gsj162.internetdsl.tpnet.pl [83.3.217.162]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2A813A672F for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 01:02:20 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100108090220.E2A813A672F@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 01:02:20 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Abedjuypez Corporation.
All rights reserved

From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 03:24:35 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CDB83A68D8 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 03:24:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_32=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0xMOBF8rzpx9 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 03:24:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EE7E3A67F6 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 03:24:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTCnC-000G6B-9N for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 11:14:10 +0000 Received: from [144.254.224.140] (helo=ams-iport-1.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTCmw-000G0N-Fj for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 11:13:54 +0000 Authentication-Results: ams-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,241,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="55977007" Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com ([144.254.224.150]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Jan 2010 11:13:52 +0000 Received: from dhcp-osl-vl300-64-103-53-222.cisco.com (dhcp-osl-vl300-64-103-53-222.cisco.com [64.103.53.222]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o08BDqwT024569; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 11:13:52 GMT Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ole Troan In-Reply-To: <20091219092859.35459a5e@opy.nosense.org> Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:13:53 +0100 Cc: Fred Baker , IPv6 Operations Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219092859.35459a5e@opy.nosense.org> To: Mark Smith X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Mark, apologies for the delay. catching up after Christmas. > "Section 4.1 WAN side configuration > > WLL-1: The IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over Ethernet [RFC2464]." > > > I don't see how that can be a MUST when the WAN interface may not > support Ethernet framing e.g. a 3G/HSPDA or Wimax IPv6 CS WAN interface. > Similarly for the PPPoE requirement (and arguably for the PPP > requirement) - > > "WLL-2: The IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over PPP [RFC5072] and > PPPoE [RFC2516]. In a dual-stack environment with IPCP and > IPV6CP running over one PPP logical channel, the NCPs MUST be > treated as independent of each other and start and terminate > independently." > > I think it would be better to try to avoid making anything relating to > IPv6-over-foo support MUSTs, keeping the scope to IPv6 CPE > requirements. If IPv6-over-foo functions are in scope for the draft, > then I'd suggest making treating them as separate sections, saying > something like, "If the WAN interface supports Ethernet encapsulation, > then it MUST support IPv6 over Ethernet [RFC2464] and PPP [RFC5072] > and PPPoE [RFC2516].", "If the WAN interface supports ATM encapsulation, > then it MUST support PPPoA [RFCXXXX]" etc. > > A future CPE's lack of compliance with this draft just because it > doesn't support Ethernet framing on it's WAN interface would be a shame. would you be happier with the following text? WLL-1: If the WAN interface supports Ethernet encapsulation, then the IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over Ethernet [RFC2464]. WLL-2: If the WAN interface supports PPP encapsulation: (a) The IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over PPP [RFC5072] and PPPoE [RFC2516]. (b) In a dual-stack environment with IPCP and IPV6CP running over one PPP logical channel, the NCPs MUST be treated as independent of each other and start and terminate independently. Best regards, Ole From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 03:45:11 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A50B83A6808 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 03:45:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_32=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dk-4+hEHbKJM for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 03:45:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBBF93A67F6 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 03:45:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTDE7-000Kjs-6c for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 11:41:59 +0000 Received: from [62.225.183.131] (helo=tcmail83.telekom.de) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTDE0-000Kj2-EV for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 11:41:53 +0000 Received: from s4de9jsaanm.mgb.telekom.de (HELO S4DE9JSAANM.ost.t-com.de) ([10.125.177.122]) by tcmail81.telekom.de with ESMTP; 08 Jan 2010 12:36:16 +0100 Received: from S4DE9JSAACY.ost.t-com.de ([10.125.177.233]) by S4DE9JSAANM.ost.t-com.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:36:15 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: AW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:36:14 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Thread-Index: AcqQVbTlgXn6hpJBR3+EBZsRdMAJ8gAAQjIw References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219092859.35459a5e@opy.nosense.org> From: To: , Cc: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Jan 2010 11:36:15.0009 (UTC) FILETIME=[C92AC110:01CA9056] Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: sounds good to me. Olaf=20 > -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- > Von: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org=20 > [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] Im Auftrag von Ole Troan > Gesendet: Freitag, 8. Januar 2010 12:14 > An: Mark Smith > Cc: Fred Baker; IPv6 Operations > Betreff: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt >=20 > Mark, >=20 > apologies for the delay. catching up after Christmas. >=20 > > "Section 4.1 WAN side configuration > >=20 > > WLL-1: The IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over Ethernet=20 > [RFC2464]." > >=20 > >=20 > > I don't see how that can be a MUST when the WAN interface may not > > support Ethernet framing e.g. a 3G/HSPDA or Wimax IPv6 CS=20 > WAN interface. > > Similarly for the PPPoE requirement (and arguably for the PPP > > requirement) -=20 > >=20 > > "WLL-2: The IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over PPP [RFC5072] and > > PPPoE [RFC2516]. In a dual-stack environment=20 > with IPCP and > > IPV6CP running over one PPP logical channel, the=20 > NCPs MUST be > > treated as independent of each other and start=20 > and terminate > > independently." > >=20 > > I think it would be better to try to avoid making anything=20 > relating to > > IPv6-over-foo support MUSTs, keeping the scope to IPv6 CPE > > requirements. If IPv6-over-foo functions are in scope for the draft, > > then I'd suggest making treating them as separate sections, saying > > something like, "If the WAN interface supports Ethernet=20 > encapsulation, > > then it MUST support IPv6 over Ethernet [RFC2464] and PPP [RFC5072] > > and PPPoE [RFC2516].", "If the WAN interface supports ATM=20 > encapsulation, > > then it MUST support PPPoA [RFCXXXX]" etc. > >=20 > > A future CPE's lack of compliance with this draft just because it > > doesn't support Ethernet framing on it's WAN interface=20 > would be a shame. >=20 > would you be happier with the following text? >=20 > WLL-1: If the WAN interface supports Ethernet encapsulation, then > the IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over Ethernet=20 > [RFC2464]. >=20 > WLL-2: If the WAN interface supports PPP encapsulation: >=20 > (a) The IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over PPP=20 > [RFC5072] > and PPPoE [RFC2516]. >=20 > (b) In a dual-stack environment with IPCP and=20 > IPV6CP running > over one PPP logical channel, the NCPs MUST be treated > as independent of each other and start and terminate > independently. >=20 > Best regards, > Ole >=20 >=20 >=20 From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 04:02:07 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E4A73A6824 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:02:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.149 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.149 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.850, BAYES_00=-2.599, MANGLED_MARKET=2.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SUdARijdEPn4 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:02:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BDC43A67EB for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:02:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTDUJ-000Nvk-5V for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 11:58:43 +0000 Received: from [144.254.224.141] (helo=ams-iport-2.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTDUC-000Nsi-Lc for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 11:58:37 +0000 Authentication-Results: ams-iport-2.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AmYAANOsRkuQ/uCWe2dsb2JhbACbUAEBFiQGowaUHoQvBA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,241,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="2260943" Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com ([144.254.224.150]) by ams-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Jan 2010 11:30:01 +0000 Received: from dhcp-osl-vl300-64-103-53-222.cisco.com (dhcp-osl-vl300-64-103-53-222.cisco.com [64.103.53.222]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o08BwYEN003428; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 11:58:34 GMT Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ole Troan In-Reply-To: <20091219161224.47262294@opy.nosense.org> Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:58:34 +0100 Cc: IPv6 Operations Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219161224.47262294@opy.nosense.org> To: Mark Smith X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Mark et al, > Maybe I'm being a bit overly paranoid about people being precious with > IPv6 address space, however, the last sentence of - >=20 >=20 > "WPD-1: The IPv6 CE router MUST support DHCP prefix delegation > requesting router behavior as specified in [RFC3633] (IA_PD > option). The IPv6 CE router MUST ask for a prefix large > enough to cover all of its LAN interfaces." >=20 > could be interpreted to mean that the ISP only needs to provide a > prefix to meet the requested size e.g. for two LAN interfaces a /63. > That would seem to me to be encouraging an "only enough" address space > model, rather than a "more than enough" address space model, which is > what I think IPv6 is aiming at. >=20 > There might be some value in stating that it is likely that an ISP = will > delegate a prefix that not only meets this minimum requirement but = also > allows for a number of additional subnets downstream of the CPE, with > the delegated prefix size likely significantly larger, possibly a /48 > or /56. IOW, stating that the delegated prefix will likely be larger > than what is requested (not that it is probably likely, but I could = see > a CPE vendor adding in a check to see if the delegated prefix size was > equal to that requested, and if it didn't, not using it). with multiple suggestions and comments on this thread. I've tried to = wordsmith two suggestions. the first one saying nothing about the hint = to the delegating router. it is after all only a weak may in rfc3633 and = most service providers would most likely just ignore the hint anyway. = the second, clearer text what the hint should be and also clarify that = it is only a hint. can we get consensus on one of these? WPD-1a: The IPv6 CE router MUST support DHCP prefix delegation requesting router behavior as specified in [RFC3633] (IA_PD option). WPD-1b: (a) The IPv6 CE router MUST support DHCP prefix delegation requesting router behavior as specified in [RFC3633] (IA_PD option). (b) The IPv6 CE router MAY indicate as a hint to the delegating router the size of the prefix it requires. If so, it MUST ask for a prefix large enough to assign one /64 for each of its interfaces rounded up to the nearest nibble and MUST be configurable to ask for more. The IPv6 CE router MUST be prepared to accept a delegated prefix size different from what is given in the hint. Best regards, Ole From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 04:08:35 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 794C63A681F for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:08:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_32=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0rqH5XNPdoox for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:08:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 701F63A67EB for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:08:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTDb6-000PQw-0P for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:05:44 +0000 Received: from [2001:608:0:1::100] (helo=moebius2.Space.Net) by psg.com with smtp (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTDax-000PNs-BJ for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:05:35 +0000 Received: (qmail 62687 invoked by uid 1007); 8 Jan 2010 12:05:33 -0000 Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=testkey; d=space.net; b=vKVya9EvKWJJ4UeSwhNgF05inot3uR3B2Eo1xLhg01FQsrRfn1GRdtJ4AqffkN3n ; Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:05:33 +0100 From: Gert Doering To: Ole Troan Cc: Mark Smith , Fred Baker , IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Message-ID: <20100108120533.GA32226@Space.Net> References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219092859.35459a5e@opy.nosense.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-NCC-RegID: de.space Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hi, On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 12:13:53PM +0100, Ole Troan wrote: > would you be happier with the following text? > > WLL-1: If the WAN interface supports Ethernet encapsulation, then > the IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over Ethernet [RFC2464]. > > WLL-2: If the WAN interface supports PPP encapsulation: > > (a) The IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over PPP [RFC5072] > and PPPoE [RFC2516]. > > (b) In a dual-stack environment with IPCP and IPV6CP running > over one PPP logical channel, the NCPs MUST be treated > as independent of each other and start and terminate > independently. I'm a bit confused about "MUST support ... PPPoE". What if the interface does PPP, but not "Ethernet" underneath? As in (gasp) PPP-over-ISDN? Besides that, I like it. gert -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 144438 SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 04:27:23 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E9A328C0ED for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:27:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.574 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.574 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.425, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_32=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Y3xjgRlYlVP3 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:27:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0EEA3A67E2 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:27:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTDsw-0002Qk-0J for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:24:10 +0000 Received: from [144.254.224.141] (helo=ams-iport-2.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTDso-0002Q1-MZ for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:24:03 +0000 Authentication-Results: ams-iport-2.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,241,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="2261881" Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com ([144.254.224.150]) by ams-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Jan 2010 11:55:27 +0000 Received: from dhcp-osl-vl300-64-103-53-222.cisco.com (dhcp-osl-vl300-64-103-53-222.cisco.com [64.103.53.222]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o08CO0mf009126; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:24:00 GMT Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ole Troan In-Reply-To: <20100108120533.GA32226@Space.Net> Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:24:00 +0100 Cc: Mark Smith , Fred Baker , IPv6 Operations Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <2AA48878-752B-4718-B6FC-5366040B61EF@cisco.com> References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219092859.35459a5e@opy.nosense.org> <20100108120533.GA32226@Space.Net> To: Gert Doering X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Gert, >> would you be happier with the following text? >> >> WLL-1: If the WAN interface supports Ethernet encapsulation, then >> the IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over Ethernet [RFC2464]. >> >> WLL-2: If the WAN interface supports PPP encapsulation: >> >> (a) The IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over PPP [RFC5072] >> and PPPoE [RFC2516]. >> >> (b) In a dual-stack environment with IPCP and IPV6CP running >> over one PPP logical channel, the NCPs MUST be treated >> as independent of each other and start and terminate >> independently. > > I'm a bit confused about "MUST support ... PPPoE". What if the interface > does PPP, but not "Ethernet" underneath? As in (gasp) PPP-over-ISDN? good point. can you propose some text? cheers, Ole From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 04:28:35 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AE393A6836 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:28:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_32=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6CYkX5neFa1v for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:28:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 735613A67E2 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:28:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTDsc-0002OY-CC for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:23:50 +0000 Received: from [194.109.24.24] (helo=smtp-vbr4.xs4all.nl) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTDsU-0002Kl-8r for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:23:42 +0000 Received: from sweet.marcoh.net (sweet.marcoh.net [195.64.86.179]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp-vbr4.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o08CMqWQ056022 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:22:52 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from marcoh@marcoh.net) Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Marco Hogewoning In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:22:51 +0100 Cc: Fred Baker , IPv6 Operations Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219092859.35459a5e@opy.nosense.org> To: Ole Troan X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: > (b) In a dual-stack environment with IPCP and IPV6CP = running > over one PPP logical channel, the NCPs MUST be treated > as independent of each other and start and terminate > independently. This by the way is a nice one...I agree with the proposed text, but = operationally we encountered some nice race conditions on this which you = might want to catch in later revisions. (For reference we run a modest install base of about 300k DSL lines, = mostly on PPPoA.) Ocassionally it happens that the IPCP gets interrupted because of = packetloss causing echos to get dropped or it fails to establish NCP at = all (lack of avaiable addresses in the free pool for instance). Now on normal occasions from a customer perspective this means the line = is broken and what usually happens (all major vendors) is that the CPE = automatically tries to reopen either by starting IPCP again or even = dropping the PPP completely and start from scratch. While doing tests with IPv6 in a dual-stack environment we found a race = condition in which the IPCP fails and the IPv6CP didn't, given IPv6 is = not well spread these days it caused the customers to phone support = because it felt "their line was broken" as they coudn't reach about = 99.99% of the internet. Technically this behavior is correct in respect = to the draft, IPCP and IPv6CP is completely seperated it out. However = what we observed is that some vendors (including major ones like Cisco) = fail to re-establish a working IPv4 connection. Now there are always multiple sides to every story because we did find a = situation where the CPE tried to reopen IPCP but our access box (JUNOSe) = kept rejecting this until the whole PPP session was killed and rebuild., = I also seen situations where the CPE was perfectly happy with the IPv6CP = only connection and didn't even tried to re-establish an IPv4 = connection. I'm not sure how to handle this, the text in the draft is correct in the = sense that you want it to be seperate, but in real life deployments, = especially during the transitioning phase you, really want IPv4 to work, = even it would mean to break down a working IPv6 link. MarcoH From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 04:32:27 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A21D3A68A2 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:32:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.016 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.016 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.583, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PUpxIPDkCKqZ for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:32:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4180E3A68A0 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:32:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTDyJ-0003GP-QX for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:29:43 +0000 Received: from [144.254.224.140] (helo=ams-iport-1.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTDyB-0003E0-Sf for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:29:36 +0000 Authentication-Results: ams-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AmYAAJ6zRkuQ/uCWe2dsb2JhbACbTwEBFiQGoyGUIIQvBA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,241,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="55979425" Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com ([144.254.224.150]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Jan 2010 12:29:24 +0000 Received: from dhcp-osl-vl300-64-103-53-222.cisco.com (dhcp-osl-vl300-64-103-53-222.cisco.com [64.103.53.222]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o08CTKxf009687; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:29:20 GMT Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ole Troan In-Reply-To: <20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org> Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:29:19 +0100 Cc: IPv6 Operations Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <0ACAAC20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com> References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org> To: Mark Smith X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Mark, > On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:09:21 -0800 > Fred Baker wrote: >=20 >> I will open a WGLC on this after new years; My mind will be elsewhere = =20 >> for the coming two weeks, I imagine yours will as well. However, if =20= >> you want to start reading/commenting now... >>=20 >=20 > I hope I'm not going to look silly because I've missed it, however, do > these CPE (as they are routers) issue RAs on their WAN interface? I'd > think a statement relating to whether they do or don't, and if they = do, > what options MUST/MUST NOT etc. are permitted should be covered in the > WAN interface section. >=20 > (as a side note, a possible use for these CPE issuing RAs is to > announce support of optional capabilities - I'm thinking about the = idea > of prefix-redirects for more optimal inter-CPE traffic flow, and a > prefix-redirect capability announcement to the upstream provider > routers in the CPE's WAN RAs would allow the provider routers to know > not to send prefix-redirects to CPE that don't support that = capability) is not the following (reformatted) requirement not clear enough? W-1: When the router is attached to the WAN interface link it MUST act as an IPv6 host for the purposes of stateless or stateful interface address assignment ([RFC4862]/[RFC3315]). The router MUST act as a requesting router for the purposes of DHCP prefix delegation ([RFC3633]). "acting as a host" is the key here. feel free to suggest better text if = you don't think that's clear enough. the WAN interface which is a host for some purposes and a router for = others is stretching the definitions in RFC4861 already. having an = interface which can do both RS and RA at the same time would be = stretching it too far. I don't know of any service provider either who = would like to see RAs from an IPv6 CE router. cheers, Ole= From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 04:50:06 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F8213A68A0 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:50:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_32=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WYf6-sWcpEwg for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:50:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20FD13A67FD for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:50:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTEF9-0006AT-0O for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:47:07 +0000 Received: from [209.85.220.225] (helo=mail-fx0-f225.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTEEt-00068X-Nz for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:46:52 +0000 Received: by fxm25 with SMTP id 25so11971521fxm.1 for ; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 04:46:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ekicsZg5RApZF946QKPJDytq0O14iQTsEwyYH5clhyU=; b=OU9AN+NefmKXY7cEYBVFiKxujx405vwosI0A3xvTiy/kpYJIATptboXGCgtzuGwF0W rXBVYpahZ0GhGHw6/ryhvfi/IDHdl8pUvUcmsek2srsPbMzd71qc+8D/AhAW/AsOlLSb z2SyfobK93lRcGkoKYshPW2x6Zi0vqwLfJSU8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=WfNLCsJdeQT4PoIiuQqrQF9QQrJl4sAB0k9F3CA6eftZCazEHrD/o7pNUEyY//dlRk D87RfgKKUaKWWGaFxe7eaPR2bKZRfklNYLeakHvTJg7Br2uYU2HwnSRrsFR38PXGEzbN Bzkg58b8s8STGooKAg0xrcimY6syQrwz9MKCE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.3.81 with SMTP id 17mr4600904fam.102.1262954810226; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 04:46:50 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <2AA48878-752B-4718-B6FC-5366040B61EF@cisco.com> References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219092859.35459a5e@opy.nosense.org> <20100108120533.GA32226@Space.Net> <2AA48878-752B-4718-B6FC-5366040B61EF@cisco.com> Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:46:50 +0100 Message-ID: <25cbe4fe1001080446y305159e7s933fabaebead94e2@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt From: Eduard Metz To: Ole Troan Cc: Gert Doering , Mark Smith , Fred Baker , IPv6 Operations Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: I experienced the same confusion, this was suggested in an earlier in this discussion, which to me seems a good alternative for WLL-2 below: If the WAN interface of the CE uses PPP/PPPoE than in a dual-stack environment with IPCP and IPV6CP running over one PPP logical channel, the NCPs MUST be treated as independent of each other and start and terminate independently. With regard to WLL-1, should this not be " If the WAN interface supports Ethernet encapsulation, then the IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over Ethernet [RFC2464] or IPv6 over PPP(oE) [RFC2516]" ? cheers, Eduard On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 1:24 PM, Ole Troan wrote: > Gert, > >>> would you be happier with the following text? >>> >>> =A0 WLL-1: =A0If the WAN interface supports Ethernet encapsulation, the= n >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 the IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over Ethernet = [RFC2464]. >>> >>> =A0 WLL-2: =A0If the WAN interface supports PPP encapsulation: >>> >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (a) =A0The IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over PP= P [RFC5072] >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0and PPPoE [RFC2516]. >>> >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (b) =A0In a dual-stack environment with IPCP and IP= V6CP running >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0over one PPP logical channel, the NCPs M= UST be treated >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0as independent of each other and start a= nd terminate >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0independently. >> >> I'm a bit confused about "MUST support ... PPPoE". =A0What if the interf= ace >> does PPP, but not "Ethernet" underneath? =A0As in (gasp) PPP-over-ISDN? > > good point. can you propose some text? > > cheers, > Ole > > > From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 05:01:47 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B37DF3A67B7 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 05:01:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SCTfRSmWlEXr for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 05:01:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 287CA3A679C for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 05:01:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTEQY-0008Qi-3s for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:58:54 +0000 Received: from [209.85.220.225] (helo=mail-fx0-f225.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTEQI-0008Ng-85 for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:58:38 +0000 Received: by fxm25 with SMTP id 25so11980413fxm.1 for ; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 04:58:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=0/zcYqKydUlPG0/uAtyxMgOeZj7uYqWgXIaXg9V3svU=; b=DXHD/O0Y8MDKlQo4JWQr2xFpCVKsCSIUclU/0mK6y9pKb/zd2e3Nzqsk4/6V760qdE qYayXk1Ts0qDnyGDTrXzEfpZJF4VrYd8OGkiM9WSxREQAy4ogtKyBvdG7BdOK/qbkSL2 NuhK9OR0isEo+Uj6XnTrUBDywGWz0EfvKllm4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=o5TxRa18n5Qd0cCoB+oolyROSjWtfcag6fqYQ2oG+cL++DKBo1OYKLLZ2wOjX8i/A0 yhY2fvvkPqZvDfNRfghwt+gRXX03Ztv/0vZ/naWJV0w2uBFQHi9TMY8jFSgeGKAGEacl xoKpBDuo/e5rx69riy9BTxqEFZqab0N6HyjtI= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.14.22 with SMTP id e22mr2142564faa.42.1262955516591; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 04:58:36 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219161224.47262294@opy.nosense.org> Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:58:36 +0100 Message-ID: <25cbe4fe1001080458x669f3e24m4e850907f7d25344@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt From: Eduard Metz To: Ole Troan Cc: Mark Smith , IPv6 Operations Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: > > =A0 WPD-1a: =A0The IPv6 CE router MUST support DHCP prefix delegation > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 requesting router behavior as specified in [RFC3633] = (IA_PD > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 option). > > =A0 WPD-1b: > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (a) =A0The IPv6 CE router MUST support DHCP prefix de= legation > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0requesting router behavior as specified in= [RFC3633] > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0(IA_PD option). > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (b) =A0The IPv6 CE router MAY indicate as a hint to t= he > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0delegating router the size of the prefix i= t requires. > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0If so, it MUST ask for a prefix large enou= gh to assign > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0one /64 for each of its interfaces rounded= up to the > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0nearest nibble and MUST be configurable to= ask for more. > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0The IPv6 CE router MUST be prepared to acc= ept a > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0delegated prefix size different from what = is given in > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0the hint. > This may be getting a bit to fuzzy. I'd prefer something more along the lines of the original statement. Assuming the intention is to ensure that each IPv6 interface in the CE router can be configured with a /64, should the requirement not be that the CE router does not request (or hint for) a prefix that is too small? (without going into saying how large it actually should be) Maybe this has been discussed before, but what is the desired behaviour of the CE router in case the delegated prefix actually is too small to assign a /64 to each of its interfaces? cheers, Eduard > > > Best regards, > Ole > > > From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 05:39:42 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEC773A6945 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 05:39:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rFIaGz6H-ZWm for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 05:39:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3891E3A690C for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 05:39:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTF2s-000EvH-F6 for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 13:38:30 +0000 Received: from [2a00:801::f] (helo=uplift.swm.pp.se) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTF2m-000Eui-KD for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 13:38:24 +0000 Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 074669C; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:38:23 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 041B79A; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:38:23 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:38:22 +0100 (CET) From: Mikael Abrahamsson To: Eduard Metz cc: Ole Troan , Gert Doering , Mark Smith , Fred Baker , IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt In-Reply-To: <25cbe4fe1001080446y305159e7s933fabaebead94e2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219092859.35459a5e@opy.nosense.org> <20100108120533.GA32226@Space.Net> <2AA48878-752B-4718-B6FC-5366040B61EF@cisco.com> <25cbe4fe1001080446y305159e7s933fabaebead94e2@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) Organization: People's Front Against WWW MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Fri, 8 Jan 2010, Eduard Metz wrote: > With regard to WLL-1, should this not be " If the WAN interface supports > Ethernet encapsulation, then the IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over > Ethernet [RFC2464] or IPv6 over PPP(oE) [RFC2516]" ? It should support BOTH then, not just one of them (which I think is the intention of the document in its current state). -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 05:41:03 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54E093A690C for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 05:41:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 770B853zVHaA for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 05:41:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A2B33A6867 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 05:41:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTF0E-000ENT-EE for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 13:35:46 +0000 Received: from [2002:d9a0:db4b:1::9] (helo=p15139323.pureserver.info) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTF07-000EH5-SY for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 13:35:40 +0000 Received: from p5ddabd1b.dip.t-dialin.net ([93.218.189.27] helo=zaphod.lan.local) by p15139323.pureserver.info with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NTF05-0004Ws-W8 for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:35:38 +0100 From: Konrad Rosenbaum To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org Subject: Re: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: =?iso-8859-1?q?=09=09draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03=2Etxt?= WGLC) Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:35:32 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1583812.58HsOMttW4"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201001081435.36106@zaphod.konrad.silmor.de> Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --nextPart1583812.58HsOMttW4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Hi, I'm trying to confirm this route-loss-problem. On Wednesday 06 January 2010, Wes Beebee (wbeebee) wrote: > If IsRouter is FALSE, Linux will incorrectly garbage collect the > addresses, leading to lack of connectivity. What specific version of Linux is this? I just took a walk through the IPv6= =20 code in Linux 2.6.26 (Debian kernel) and did some experiments with it. I=20 could not find the problem. Although I must admit I'm not a kernel expert. Yes, the fib6_age function in ip6_fib.c under some circumstances deletes=20 cached routes via non-routers (gateways), but there is a difference between= =20 the FIB main (routing) table and the FIB cache (shortcuts for already=20 resolved walks through the main table - it is just a speedup table). The=20 entries established during CE-SP handshake will reside in the main table,=20 which is not affected. The only collection that happens in the main table=20 is timer based (based on the timeout given in RAs). Experiment: SP - a server running pppoe-server, with RAdvD and some DHCP server CE - my makeshift router, running pppoe-client and a simple Ethernet Host - a simple host on the Ethernet to CE [SP] <--PPP-link--> [CE] <--Ethernet--> [Host] The ethernet was setup manually with default route towards CE, so no=20 collection here. If I took the steps to setup RAdvD on it, RAs would keep=20 everything alive. So no issue either way. The SP is set up to be router on all interfaces. The CE is host on PPP and router on Ethernet. The Host is host. On the CE the PPP-link is setup in this order: IPCPv6, (automatic) RS-RA,=20 optionally DHCP-IAPD which would configure the IP addr and RAdvD for the=20 Ethernet, if it honours timeouts it will repeat the process in time. The=20 PPP-link and its routes will be kept alive through RA's from the SP, or=20 regular RS-RA-pairs. Nothing strange happens... The SP side of the PPP-link is configured from the PPP scripts. Which means= =20 manual routes, which do not get collected at all until the link goes down. I waited for all the timeouts to run out (a few minutes on my setup) and th= e=20 =46IB caches to clear (less than a minute). But I could still ping from=20 anywhere in my setup to anywhere else in it. Actually the FIB cache was not= =20 even used for PPP links. In conclusion: unless I completely and intentionally screw up the setup=20 manually, both links will always have complete routes on either end. The=20 only difference after FIB cache garbage collection is that the first ping=20 packet needs 10ms instead of 5ms. Did I miss the scenario? > What mischief happens if the CE Router always sets IsRouter to TRUE on > both WAN and LAN interfaces? The CE would shoot itself squarely into the foot: since it does not do a RS= =20 on the PPP-link, it will never know about its on-link prefix and will set=20 some routes wrongly (which would need to be corrected manually). I wasn't=20 even able to get pings to route from Host to SP if the CE had its ppp-link= =20 configured as router. Konrad --nextPart1583812.58HsOMttW4 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAktHNKQACgkQyxXJkXI6YgBKRACgii7ZV8bf+yulNgTZt02+FnCt hckAn1RMWQ/lmN2ExFS4QV73gi6noCwA =c4AN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1583812.58HsOMttW4-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 05:47:05 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 642963A6962 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 05:47:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id enEhR2ZOMgs8 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 05:47:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85E463A6867 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 05:47:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTFAW-000GIS-TL for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 13:46:24 +0000 Received: from [2001:608:0:1::100] (helo=moebius2.Space.Net) by psg.com with smtp (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTFAQ-000GHW-Cx for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 13:46:18 +0000 Received: (qmail 84471 invoked by uid 1007); 8 Jan 2010 13:46:17 -0000 Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=testkey; d=space.net; b=DltXa6lHB2uzAMjV6H1WWU9ZwQ/1mMJEmahN0R65cCQX+d2+z4PpmlGEUicX1O5E ; Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:46:17 +0100 From: Gert Doering To: Mikael Abrahamsson Cc: Eduard Metz , Ole Troan , Gert Doering , Mark Smith , Fred Baker , IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Message-ID: <20100108134617.GD32226@Space.Net> References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219092859.35459a5e@opy.nosense.org> <20100108120533.GA32226@Space.Net> <2AA48878-752B-4718-B6FC-5366040B61EF@cisco.com> <25cbe4fe1001080446y305159e7s933fabaebead94e2@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="BiZUvs6NEg5l02gX" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-NCC-RegID: de.space Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --BiZUvs6NEg5l02gX Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 02:38:22PM +0100, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Fri, 8 Jan 2010, Eduard Metz wrote: >=20 > >With regard to WLL-1, should this not be " If the WAN interface supports= =20 > >Ethernet encapsulation, then the IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over= =20 > >Ethernet [RFC2464] or IPv6 over PPP(oE) [RFC2516]" ? >=20 > It should support BOTH then, not just one of them (which I think is the= =20 > intention of the document in its current state). What's wrong with a CPE that doesn't support PPPoE for IPv4? Wouldn't it be acceptable then to not-support PPPoE for IPv6 either? There might be "pure ethernet" CPEs out there, with no PPP stack in them (my guess would be that cable CPEs do "Ethernet encapsulation/framing" but not "PPPoE"). Gert Doering -- NetMaster --=20 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 144438 SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 --BiZUvs6NEg5l02gX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iQCVAwUBS0c3KakuBuNlUUl1AQKDPQP+O1fXJhwmghWsgDecu4h+jYKw+mxCPckC GsLzKw/sUWXJHYApJPgQM9JNLNWZC3A7j7qv7oWvVRulxnGYOC+LOZ6ycBYpMnkP nOJVynS4AHUW+XrPQOW1nL5xWEaG41lYVMGgFQjoiB7Xh6JYUT3yC5ejw4n+oIzN ntMWY7Wk2qQ= =wTmA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --BiZUvs6NEg5l02gX-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 05:47:19 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDDB43A6867 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 05:47:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.149 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.149 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_32=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XZE3Od17sW-R for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 05:47:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 214FB3A6783 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 05:47:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTF8p-000FwP-CR for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 13:44:39 +0000 Received: from [2001:608:0:1::100] (helo=moebius2.Space.Net) by psg.com with smtp (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTF8U-000FtN-FT for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 13:44:18 +0000 Received: (qmail 83410 invoked by uid 1007); 8 Jan 2010 13:44:17 -0000 Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=testkey; d=space.net; b=S5vv7uSHgzOGYQyjLIu5k87912GIj1902d/Y5EuzfFXhM2njr/ZOgO7aRek2ghe4 ; Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:44:17 +0100 From: Gert Doering To: Ole Troan Cc: Gert Doering , Mark Smith , Fred Baker , IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Message-ID: <20100108134417.GC32226@Space.Net> References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219092859.35459a5e@opy.nosense.org> <20100108120533.GA32226@Space.Net> <2AA48878-752B-4718-B6FC-5366040B61EF@cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="bcfRmD8y4hpOeJjo" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2AA48878-752B-4718-B6FC-5366040B61EF@cisco.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-NCC-RegID: de.space Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --bcfRmD8y4hpOeJjo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 01:24:00PM +0100, Ole Troan wrote: > >> would you be happier with the following text? > >>=20 > >> WLL-1: If the WAN interface supports Ethernet encapsulation, then > >> the IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over Ethernet [RFC2464]. > >>=20 > >> WLL-2: If the WAN interface supports PPP encapsulation: > >>=20 > >> (a) The IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over PPP [RFC5072] > >> and PPPoE [RFC2516]. > >>=20 > >> (b) In a dual-stack environment with IPCP and IPV6CP running > >> over one PPP logical channel, the NCPs MUST be treated > >> as independent of each other and start and terminate > >> independently. > >=20 > > I'm a bit confused about "MUST support ... PPPoE". What if the interfa= ce > > does PPP, but not "Ethernet" underneath? As in (gasp) PPP-over-ISDN? >=20 > good point. can you propose some text? Bah... but let me try. I'm not completely sure what we *are* trying to say, especially given "Ethernet" vs. "PPPoE". But let's try (also taking MarcoH's point into account): WLL-1: If the WAN interface supports non-PPPoE Ethernet encapsulation,= =20 then the IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over Ethernet [RFC2464]. WLL-2: If the WAN interface supports PPP encapsulation: (a) The IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over PPP [RFC5072]. (b) In a dual-stack environment with IPCP and IPV6CP running over one PPP logical channel, the NCPs MUST be treated as independent of each other and start and terminate independently. It SHOULD be configurable to restart the whole PPP session in the case of one NCP consistently=20 failing to come up. Gert Doering -- NetMaster --=20 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 144438 SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 --bcfRmD8y4hpOeJjo Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iQCVAwUBS0c2sakuBuNlUUl1AQJrFQP+JXjFaZgrfY96TWwuxTMaR0yONEsIg2ba 8YsKIgqHxB/E3fhBvMLj35uJEGEcTDhTyfq/PJ0RkfGuJLFjKuFGKTGzriQBDrWp tTBC2rId0SXvqXCzRgucbHMa3DN+fUDnjahkzMok9EuVOxL5LjfBX5h3FCjMGwg8 8W4cODBJf9o= =yhwL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --bcfRmD8y4hpOeJjo-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 06:14:07 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E46B3A6862 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 06:14:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vLis9WNOS0qT for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 06:14:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A86303A67B5 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 06:14:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTFZD-000KoG-L4 for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:11:55 +0000 Received: from [2a00:801::f] (helo=uplift.swm.pp.se) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTFZ6-000KnP-4T for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:11:48 +0000 Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 7DCC99C; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 15:11:46 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C26E9A; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 15:11:46 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 15:11:46 +0100 (CET) From: Mikael Abrahamsson To: Gert Doering cc: Eduard Metz , Ole Troan , Mark Smith , Fred Baker , IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt In-Reply-To: <20100108134617.GD32226@Space.Net> Message-ID: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219092859.35459a5e@opy.nosense.org> <20100108120533.GA32226@Space.Net> <2AA48878-752B-4718-B6FC-5366040B61EF@cisco.com> <25cbe4fe1001080446y305159e7s933fabaebead94e2@mail.gmail.com> <20100108134617.GD32226@Space.Net> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) Organization: People's Front Against WWW MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Fri, 8 Jan 2010, Gert Doering wrote: >>> With regard to WLL-1, should this not be " If the WAN interface supports >>> Ethernet encapsulation, then the IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over >>> Ethernet [RFC2464] or IPv6 over PPP(oE) [RFC2516]" ? >> >> It should support BOTH then, not just one of them (which I think is the >> intention of the document in its current state). > > What's wrong with a CPE that doesn't support PPPoE for IPv4? Wouldn't > it be acceptable then to not-support PPPoE for IPv6 either? Absolutely, but I don't think it's acceptable to have a CPE that only supports IPv6 PPPoE, and doesn't support it natively. This is what I read the original text to want, and I'm fine with that. I'm disagreeing with any text that implies that native IPv6 support is optional. I now read that my reply could be interpreted that I was saying the current text says that native is optional, this is not the case. As I read the text, it's saying that IPv6 native is mandatory, and PPPoE is optional, and then says what is required in case of PPPoE support. This is good. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 06:21:51 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F9C43A6862 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 06:21:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.399 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.200, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id djlxh61OUl13 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 06:21:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 827A93A6784 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 06:21:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTFfG-000M2M-QP for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:18:10 +0000 Received: from [2001:608:0:1::100] (helo=moebius2.Space.Net) by psg.com with smtp (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTFf8-000M1i-Ir for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:18:03 +0000 Received: (qmail 91230 invoked by uid 1007); 8 Jan 2010 14:18:01 -0000 Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=testkey; d=space.net; b=ABg/96StBYwUWWoVuvAcA4yokCqj33mcBWiDAYBJcskSwFkuAUr+Aaxh83s/ei1q ; Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 15:18:01 +0100 From: Gert Doering To: Mikael Abrahamsson Cc: Gert Doering , Eduard Metz , Ole Troan , Mark Smith , Fred Baker , IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Message-ID: <20100108141801.GG32226@Space.Net> References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219092859.35459a5e@opy.nosense.org> <20100108120533.GA32226@Space.Net> <2AA48878-752B-4718-B6FC-5366040B61EF@cisco.com> <25cbe4fe1001080446y305159e7s933fabaebead94e2@mail.gmail.com> <20100108134617.GD32226@Space.Net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="V41nKxnaF5AFt0qK" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-NCC-RegID: de.space Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --V41nKxnaF5AFt0qK Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 03:11:46PM +0100, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > Absolutely, but I don't think it's acceptable to have a CPE that only=20 > supports IPv6 PPPoE, and doesn't support it natively. This is what I read= =20 > the original text to want, and I'm fine with that. I'm disagreeing with= =20 > any text that implies that native IPv6 support is optional. Well, what's "native" in a CPE that has a built-in DSL modem which only supports PPPoE encapsulation...? What I want to see is "if it can do encapsulation X (at all), it should be able to do PPP-over-X, as per RFC [Z]". I do not see strong need to mandate "it must do encapsulation A, B and C",= =20 because the target customer base might not have or want "A" and "C"... Gert Doering -- NetMaster --=20 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 144438 SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 --V41nKxnaF5AFt0qK Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iQCVAwUBS0c+makuBuNlUUl1AQK10wP/UJcQjQ7n4FrB8SqX4T89zztic52DCJUN DZQ0OO1ao5z4OC67IXf9L+AZOxJ06SmIpfNZEmxVvIhoBUD/9rt03XRmMVo4DRYM fiwyGzjH2pL99OMubvCGjU4kUrwYAIl2WuIqtkDM4FAFP9h03lB93Mt6CJpgyWvg ffRNbYCnPSM= =i3l2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --V41nKxnaF5AFt0qK-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 06:25:08 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80BC63A6862 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 06:25:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RqSQEbfD0ZuX for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 06:25:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C97A03A67B5 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 06:25:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTFjO-000MeO-2V for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:22:26 +0000 Received: from [2a00:801::f] (helo=uplift.swm.pp.se) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTFjG-000Mdj-GV for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:22:18 +0000 Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id CDD529C; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 15:22:16 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC9C49A; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 15:22:16 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 15:22:16 +0100 (CET) From: Mikael Abrahamsson To: Gert Doering cc: Eduard Metz , Ole Troan , Mark Smith , Fred Baker , IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt In-Reply-To: <20100108141801.GG32226@Space.Net> Message-ID: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219092859.35459a5e@opy.nosense.org> <20100108120533.GA32226@Space.Net> <2AA48878-752B-4718-B6FC-5366040B61EF@cisco.com> <25cbe4fe1001080446y305159e7s933fabaebead94e2@mail.gmail.com> <20100108134617.GD32226@Space.Net> <20100108141801.GG32226@Space.Net> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) Organization: People's Front Against WWW MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Fri, 8 Jan 2010, Gert Doering wrote: > Well, what's "native" in a CPE that has a built-in DSL modem which only > supports PPPoE encapsulation...? If it supports 1483bridged then it supports ethernet and then it should support native IPv6 over that. If it only supports PPPoA, then it's not ethernet and then it's fine to only support PPP. The original text is still fine as far as I see. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 07:17:13 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF9CB3A683C for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 07:17:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.499 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZZVFUh4mzMEW for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 07:17:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAC0D3A67EA for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 07:17:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTGUa-0006hi-0H for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 15:11:12 +0000 Received: from [171.68.10.87] (helo=sj-iport-5.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTGUS-0006gZ-FH for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 15:11:04 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-5.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,242,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="130370808" Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.223.137]) by sj-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Jan 2010 15:11:02 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com [72.163.62.138]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o08FArqa002333; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 15:11:02 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-201.cisco.com ([72.163.62.208]) by xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:10:54 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:10:53 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <25cbe4fe1001080458x669f3e24m4e850907f7d25344@mail.gmail.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Thread-Index: AcqQYpxiKpwh2LVBQI6aNyuZcD8tdgAESwFA References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219161224.47262294@opy.nosense.org> <25cbe4fe1001080458x669f3e24m4e850907f7d25344@mail.gmail.com> From: "Wes Beebee (wbeebee)" To: "Eduard Metz" , "Ole Troan" Cc: "Mark Smith" , "IPv6 Operations" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Jan 2010 15:10:54.0118 (UTC) FILETIME=[C5B6D460:01CA9074] Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: >> =A0 WPD-1b: >> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (a) =A0The IPv6 CE router MUST support DHCP = prefix delegation >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0requesting router behavior as = specified in [RFC3633] >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0(IA_PD option). >> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (b) =A0The IPv6 CE router MAY indicate as a hint = to the >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0delegating router the size of the = prefix it requires. >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0If so, it MUST ask for a prefix large = enough to assign >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0one /64 for each of its interfaces = rounded up to the >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0nearest nibble and MUST be = configurable to ask for more. >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0The IPv6 CE router MUST be prepared to = accept a >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0delegated prefix size different from = what is given in >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0the hint.=20 > >This may be getting a bit to fuzzy. I'd prefer something more along the = lines of the original statement. >Assuming the intention is to ensure that each IPv6 interface in the CE = router can be configured with a > /64, should the requirement not be that the CE router does not request = (or hint for) a prefix that is > too small? (without going into saying how large it actually should be) > > Maybe this has been discussed before, but what is the desired = behaviour of the CE router in case the > delegated prefix actually is too small to assign a /64 to each of its = interfaces? I suspect that the behavior for a too small prefix would be = vendor-dependent as I don't think that we could end up with recommending = a specific behavior that would pass IETF consensus. However, I think = that asking for a prefix large enough to do SLAAC, even if you don't get = it, is behavior that is completely reasonable and the right thing to do = - but shouldn't be mandated. Stating this hint in this document is a = heads-up to service providers to expect that some CE routers may have = this behavior. Therefore, I agree with the text of WPD-1b as is - = subject to possibly breaking up MAYs and MUSTs as we're doing elsewhere = in the document. - Wes From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 07:21:06 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AD5C3A6818 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 07:21:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ftjQWR1sI9Ul for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 07:21:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80A9B3A6800 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 07:21:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTGbG-0008FA-Ln for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 15:18:06 +0000 Received: from [209.85.220.225] (helo=mail-fx0-f225.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTGb9-0008Dp-BL for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 15:17:59 +0000 Received: by fxm25 with SMTP id 25so12107382fxm.1 for ; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 07:17:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=OjdvrlII8JZaw3Zht52cIljpfg27e29fx8hro4S+32c=; b=shR42nZiYBUOZvucOYd2tj5AJVc2PNeUFtvkw88o50/sAeQLq5gG17xVT+iGa/erpM 5lzQTUqpJgbJWWjqe/XY7dEwvHoSETdpgdulJ51JblVVyM5d8DGYYSwTeEEh3pGjz0AT BZ6xPi93JSt/UyU0m5L4KhXEP1AcmtLVHHRMc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=AgUzMTvHCif/3vhAF02yCbO7MgfANRhDkN6yo0uaJjR0P4FoftWhrausNbe6xLG65I HbjkjBR6WdfN//E/cc8x2oxFTaxSAtPraAhWl9pI9qH215jKlQW6WvE2E+DaRvb+z0vq St3dmTFK/vmZDFevts8VA0mnU0kS1AC7/TGEI= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.5.23 with SMTP id 23mr4399566fat.53.1262963877955; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 07:17:57 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <20100108120533.GA32226@Space.Net> <2AA48878-752B-4718-B6FC-5366040B61EF@cisco.com> <25cbe4fe1001080446y305159e7s933fabaebead94e2@mail.gmail.com> <20100108134617.GD32226@Space.Net> <20100108141801.GG32226@Space.Net> Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 16:17:57 +0100 Message-ID: <25cbe4fe1001080717p7ad04d7eg5c37542255a0b3b3@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt From: Eduard Metz To: Mikael Abrahamsson Cc: Gert Doering , Ole Troan , Mark Smith , Fred Baker , IPv6 Operations Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Is the intention really to mandate "native IPv6 support" over the link-layer of the WAN interface? (2492 in the below case?) If so this could be captured in a generic statement (assuming other documents specify IPv6overX). Specifically for Ethernet there are two common models for broadband access, the 'native' model en the PPP(oE) model. Why would this draft mandate one if it is already known upfront many will be using the other? cheers, Eduard On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 3:22 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote= : > On Fri, 8 Jan 2010, Gert Doering wrote: > >> Well, what's "native" in a CPE that has a built-in DSL modem which only >> supports PPPoE encapsulation...? > > If it supports 1483bridged then it supports ethernet and then it should > support native IPv6 over that. If it only supports PPPoA, then it's not > ethernet and then it's fine to only support PPP. The original text is sti= ll > fine as far as I see. > > -- > Mikael Abrahamsson =A0 =A0email: swmike@swm.pp.se > From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 09:02:45 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C9143A6810 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:02:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.507 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.507 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.092, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 10+ugeL1EhIX for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:02:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FAE63A677C for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:02:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTIB1-000PxD-Uq for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 16:59:07 +0000 Received: from [130.76.96.56] (helo=stl-smtpout-01.boeing.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTIAv-000Pwi-2m for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 16:59:01 +0000 Received: from slb-av-01.boeing.com (slb-av-01.boeing.com [129.172.13.4]) by stl-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/8.14.0/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id o08GwqIb015454 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 10:58:53 -0600 (CST) Received: from slb-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by slb-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o08Gwq2X020620; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 08:58:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NWHT-10.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwht-10.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.25.113]) by slb-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o08GwjRp020368 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 08:58:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.64.97]) by XCH-NWHT-10.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.25.113]) with mapi; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 08:58:52 -0800 From: "Templin, Fred L" To: Ole Troan , Mark Smith CC: IPv6 Operations Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 08:58:51 -0800 Subject: RE: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Thread-Topic: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Thread-Index: AcqQX0d5o+CX0LYIQg6EZO7/x/RewQAI61Kw Message-ID: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org> <0ACAAC20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <0ACAAC20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Ole, > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On Behal= f Of Ole Troan > Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 4:29 AM > To: Mark Smith > Cc: IPv6 Operations > Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt >=20 > Mark, >=20 > > On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:09:21 -0800 > > Fred Baker wrote: > > > >> I will open a WGLC on this after new years; My mind will be elsewhere > >> for the coming two weeks, I imagine yours will as well. However, if > >> you want to start reading/commenting now... > >> > > > > I hope I'm not going to look silly because I've missed it, however, do > > these CPE (as they are routers) issue RAs on their WAN interface? I'd > > think a statement relating to whether they do or don't, and if they do, > > what options MUST/MUST NOT etc. are permitted should be covered in the > > WAN interface section. > > > > (as a side note, a possible use for these CPE issuing RAs is to > > announce support of optional capabilities - I'm thinking about the idea > > of prefix-redirects for more optimal inter-CPE traffic flow, and a > > prefix-redirect capability announcement to the upstream provider > > routers in the CPE's WAN RAs would allow the provider routers to know > > not to send prefix-redirects to CPE that don't support that capability) >=20 > is not the following (reformatted) requirement not clear enough? >=20 > W-1: When the router is attached to the WAN interface link it MUST > act as an IPv6 host for the purposes of stateless or stateful > interface address assignment ([RFC4862]/[RFC3315]). The router > MUST act as a requesting router for the purposes of DHCP prefix > delegation ([RFC3633]). >=20 > "acting as a host" is the key here. feel free to suggest better text if y= ou don't think that's clear > enough. >=20 > the WAN interface which is a host for some purposes and a router for othe= rs is stretching the > definitions in RFC4861 already. having an interface which can do both RS = and RA at the same time > would be stretching it too far. Why can't a CPE router send unicast RAs to other CPE routers as long as they are not malicious and do not in any way conflict with the RAs sent by SP routers? Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com > I don't know of any service provider either who would like to see RAs > from an IPv6 CE router. >=20 > cheers, > Ole From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 09:16:55 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E10643A686A for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:16:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id U6wms+-mKroZ for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:16:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24D713A6862 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:16:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTIPN-0002TH-Qr for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 17:13:57 +0000 Received: from [2001:608:0:1::100] (helo=moebius2.Space.Net) by psg.com with smtp (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTIPF-0002Sd-NN for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 17:13:50 +0000 Received: (qmail 28731 invoked by uid 1007); 8 Jan 2010 17:13:47 -0000 Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=testkey; d=space.net; b=Ij2XgULyJsMXCvDnjViVi8Spiu7hAFbFRZW9divw0vZTIhL6YomeLv+j7L6Ft1U0 ; Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 18:13:47 +0100 From: Gert Doering To: "Templin, Fred L" Cc: Ole Troan , Mark Smith , IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Message-ID: <20100108171347.GI32226@Space.Net> References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org> <0ACAAC20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-NCC-RegID: de.space Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hi, On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 08:58:51AM -0800, Templin, Fred L wrote: > Why can't a CPE router send unicast RAs to other CPE > routers as long as they are not malicious and do not > in any way conflict with the RAs sent by SP routers? How do you verify those are not malicious? Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 144438 SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 09:39:10 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 371FF3A686A for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:39:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.515 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.515 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.084, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lQGtE9dRCKs0 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:39:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C1323A6840 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:39:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTIi8-0005PG-10 for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 17:33:20 +0000 Received: from [130.76.96.56] (helo=stl-smtpout-01.boeing.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTIi1-0005Op-Ac for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 17:33:13 +0000 Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (blv-av-01.boeing.com [130.247.48.231]) by stl-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/8.14.0/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id o08HX7ra004546 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 11:33:07 -0600 (CST) Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o08HX6pB007140; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:33:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NWHT-05.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwht-05.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.25.109]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o08HX6Fj007136 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:33:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.64.97]) by XCH-NWHT-05.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.25.109]) with mapi; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:33:06 -0800 From: "Templin, Fred L" To: Gert Doering CC: Ole Troan , Mark Smith , IPv6 Operations Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:33:05 -0800 Subject: RE: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Thread-Topic: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Thread-Index: AcqQhfMAsAAJOjKdTWejyAGWQP4zAQAAM8wQ Message-ID: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org> <0ACAAC20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com> <20100108171347.GI32226@Space.Net> In-Reply-To: <20100108171347.GI32226@Space.Net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Gert Doering [mailto:gert@space.net] > Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 9:14 AM > To: Templin, Fred L > Cc: Ole Troan; Mark Smith; IPv6 Operations > Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt >=20 > Hi, >=20 > On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 08:58:51AM -0800, Templin, Fred L wrote: > > Why can't a CPE router send unicast RAs to other CPE > > routers as long as they are not malicious and do not > > in any way conflict with the RAs sent by SP routers? >=20 > How do you verify those are not malicious? The sending CPE has to supply sufficient credentials to prove that it is authorized to advertise a given set of prefixes. Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com > Gert Doering > -- NetMaster > -- > Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 144438 >=20 > SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard > Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culema= nn > D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) > Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 10:00:02 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7EDF3A68A3 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 10:00:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -107.522 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-107.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.077, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JZ-H7fer0BbJ for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 10:00:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 779CD3A687A for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 10:00:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTJ4l-00099Y-PY for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 17:56:43 +0000 Received: from [130.76.32.69] (helo=blv-smtpout-01.boeing.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTJ4e-00097W-NT for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 17:56:36 +0000 Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (blv-av-01.boeing.com [130.247.48.231]) by blv-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/8.14.0/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id o08HuZ8X020301 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:56:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o08HuZdK001798; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:56:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NWHT-01.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwht-01.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.70.222]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o08HuZ0S001792 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:56:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.64.97]) by XCH-NWHT-01.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.70.222]) with mapi; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:56:34 -0800 From: "Templin, Fred L" To: Konrad Rosenbaum , "v6ops@ops.ietf.org" Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:56:32 -0800 Subject: RE: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Topic: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC) Thread-Index: AcqQaOrsiLrGIJdzSFa7fLED1We43wAIUdrw Message-ID: References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> <201001081435.36106@zaphod.konrad.silmor.de> In-Reply-To: <201001081435.36106@zaphod.konrad.silmor.de> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US x-tm-as-product-ver: SMEX-8.0.0.1181-6.000.1038-17118.005 x-tm-as-result: No--64.091200-8.000000-31 x-tm-as-user-approved-sender: No x-tm-as-user-blocked-sender: No Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Konrad, It was excellent for you to have performed such a thorough investigation, but the high-order consideration is this: > Yes, the fib6_age function in ip6_fib.c under some circumstances deletes > cached routes via non-routers (gateways), Here, we have an implementation (linux kernel) that is widely used as the basis for router products, and that takes action based on the setting of the IsRouter flag in neighbor cache entries. Linux is operating outside the letter of the RFC4861 law in this regard, and if Linux is making its own interpretation (no matter how innocuous) then other implementations may be making their own interpretations which may not be so innocuous. Therefore, there needs to be a warning label. Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On Behal= f Of Konrad Rosenbaum > Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 5:36 AM > To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org > Subject: Re: CPE router acting as host on its WAN interface (RE: draft-ie= tf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router- > 03.txt WGLC) >=20 > Hi, >=20 > I'm trying to confirm this route-loss-problem. >=20 > On Wednesday 06 January 2010, Wes Beebee (wbeebee) wrote: > > If IsRouter is FALSE, Linux will incorrectly garbage collect the > > addresses, leading to lack of connectivity. >=20 > What specific version of Linux is this? I just took a walk through the IP= v6 > code in Linux 2.6.26 (Debian kernel) and did some experiments with it. I > could not find the problem. Although I must admit I'm not a kernel expert= . >=20 > Yes, the fib6_age function in ip6_fib.c under some circumstances deletes > cached routes via non-routers (gateways), but there is a difference betwe= en > the FIB main (routing) table and the FIB cache (shortcuts for already > resolved walks through the main table - it is just a speedup table). The > entries established during CE-SP handshake will reside in the main table, > which is not affected. The only collection that happens in the main table > is timer based (based on the timeout given in RAs). >=20 > Experiment: > SP - a server running pppoe-server, with RAdvD and some DHCP server > CE - my makeshift router, running pppoe-client and a simple Ethernet > Host - a simple host on the Ethernet to CE >=20 > [SP] <--PPP-link--> [CE] <--Ethernet--> [Host] >=20 > The ethernet was setup manually with default route towards CE, so no > collection here. If I took the steps to setup RAdvD on it, RAs would keep > everything alive. So no issue either way. >=20 > The SP is set up to be router on all interfaces. >=20 > The CE is host on PPP and router on Ethernet. >=20 > The Host is host. >=20 > On the CE the PPP-link is setup in this order: IPCPv6, (automatic) RS-RA, > optionally DHCP-IAPD which would configure the IP addr and RAdvD for the > Ethernet, if it honours timeouts it will repeat the process in time. The > PPP-link and its routes will be kept alive through RA's from the SP, or > regular RS-RA-pairs. Nothing strange happens... >=20 > The SP side of the PPP-link is configured from the PPP scripts. Which mea= ns > manual routes, which do not get collected at all until the link goes down= . >=20 > I waited for all the timeouts to run out (a few minutes on my setup) and = the > FIB caches to clear (less than a minute). But I could still ping from > anywhere in my setup to anywhere else in it. Actually the FIB cache was n= ot > even used for PPP links. >=20 > In conclusion: unless I completely and intentionally screw up the setup > manually, both links will always have complete routes on either end. The > only difference after FIB cache garbage collection is that the first ping > packet needs 10ms instead of 5ms. >=20 > Did I miss the scenario? >=20 > > What mischief happens if the CE Router always sets IsRouter to TRUE on > > both WAN and LAN interfaces? >=20 > The CE would shoot itself squarely into the foot: since it does not do a = RS > on the PPP-link, it will never know about its on-link prefix and will set > some routes wrongly (which would need to be corrected manually). I wasn't > even able to get pings to route from Host to SP if the CE had its ppp-lin= k > configured as router. >=20 >=20 > Konrad From environs4@sibbanks.ru Fri Jan 8 11:28:03 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31F5A3A67FB; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 11:28:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -11.786 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.786 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.785, BAYES_99=3.5, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_EQ_BR=0.955, HOST_EQ_BR=1.295, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_72=0.6, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_PH_SURBL=1.787, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0XAPvW0uAY7H; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 11:28:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from 20158069208.user.veloxzone.com.br (20158069208.user.veloxzone.com.br [201.58.69.208]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 055F73A67A5; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 11:28:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from 201.58.69.208 by rinet.fis.ru; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 16:27:56 -0300 From: "noreply@ietf.org" To: Subject: A new settings file for the svrloc-archive@ietf.org mailbox has just been released Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 16:27:56 -0300 Message-ID: <000d01ca9098$ae0a2690$6400a8c0@environs4> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000E_01CA9098.AE0A2690" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3338.1 Importance: Normal This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01CA9098.AE0A2690 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear user of the ietf.org mailing service!We are informing you that because of the security upgrade of the mailing service your mailbox (svrloc-archive@ietf.org) settings were changed. In order to apply the new set of settings click on the following link:http://ietf.org/owa/service_directory/settings.php?email=svrloc-archive@ietf.org&from=ietf.org&fromname=svrloc-archiveBest regards, ietf.org Technical Support.Letter-ID#78N8AHMY1F5NOU7167SL9F33KF0GN9E ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01CA9098.AE0A2690 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear user of the ietf.o= rg mailing service!

We are informing you that because of the securit= y upgrade of the mailing service your mailbox (svrloc-archive@ietf.org) settings were changed. In order= to apply the new set of settings click on the following link:

http://ietf.org/owa/service_directory/settings.php?email=3Dsvrloc-= archive@ietf.org&from=3Dietf.org&fromname=3Dsvrloc-archive
Best regards, ietf.org Technical Support.

Letter-ID#78N8AHMY1F5NOU= 7167SL9F33KF0GN9E

------=_NextPart_000_000E_01CA9098.AE0A2690-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 12:00:22 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 192DF28C0D8 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:00:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.966 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.966 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.033, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_32=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XNKE4z1smD5C for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:00:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFC1628C126 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:00:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTKt2-0000Z2-U3 for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 19:52:44 +0000 Received: from [209.85.211.191] (helo=mail-yw0-f191.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTKsw-0000Y3-Na for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 19:52:38 +0000 Received: by ywh29 with SMTP id 29so23338685ywh.32 for ; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 11:52:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=sHJO/iSOPZ3H4lib2syTLb07jf/Go8LxhA1WFkWe6o0=; b=R/f3RLf+9C9eLvAc5NSVPOpYiTbxbFN5mfU2K9W9FqcONRcUOih/jk9v2jWMGbi2ra WJ7pS+orA6pIgWubE9dh6cFRb8obELPUlw+Whgjo1X3J4yxcBTePQdEwxwz7OyrTzt4O avT5RZCHUT/qQWJ880TDRGNxrSfWANoWVuUHA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=ZQ8IaoHofIVTMPOW0PxKB++WYmz/SrqHngFcLg3LrheNKXFg8nCA92PB1GxfUuZ4jR bc6XTyQQy8WgtFx3b/3m357r/+xrL49e+0xxDhrnD1anxu7TXhxm7tpp5ep8jYneGJV6 gmL6Clsjyh/heEpqrvdXaq1lBjq9ZwAsaaCwU= Received: by 10.101.176.7 with SMTP id d7mr14226443anp.71.1262980358033; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 11:52:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?10.1.1.4? ([121.98.142.15]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 4sm8088521ywi.27.2010.01.08.11.52.35 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 08 Jan 2010 11:52:37 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B478CFF.7020703@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 09 Jan 2010 08:52:31 +1300 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gert Doering CC: Ole Troan , Mark Smith , Fred Baker , IPv6 Operations Subject: PPPoE [Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt] References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219092859.35459a5e@opy.nosense.org> <20100108120533.GA32226@Space.Net> <2AA48878-752B-4718-B6FC-5366040B61EF@cisco.com> <20100108134417.GC32226@Space.Net> In-Reply-To: <20100108134417.GC32226@Space.Net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On 2010-01-09 02:44, Gert Doering wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 01:24:00PM +0100, Ole Troan wrote: >>>> would you be happier with the following text? >>>> >>>> WLL-1: If the WAN interface supports Ethernet encapsulation, then >>>> the IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over Ethernet [RFC2464]. >>>> >>>> WLL-2: If the WAN interface supports PPP encapsulation: >>>> >>>> (a) The IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over PPP [RFC5072] >>>> and PPPoE [RFC2516]. >>>> >>>> (b) In a dual-stack environment with IPCP and IPV6CP running >>>> over one PPP logical channel, the NCPs MUST be treated >>>> as independent of each other and start and terminate >>>> independently. >>> I'm a bit confused about "MUST support ... PPPoE". What if the interface >>> does PPP, but not "Ethernet" underneath? As in (gasp) PPP-over-ISDN? >> good point. can you propose some text? > > Bah... but let me try. I'm not completely sure what we *are* trying to > say, especially given "Ethernet" vs. "PPPoE". But let's try (also > taking MarcoH's point into account): > > > WLL-1: If the WAN interface supports non-PPPoE Ethernet encapsulation, > then the IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over Ethernet [RFC2464]. > > WLL-2: If the WAN interface supports PPP encapsulation: > > (a) The IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over PPP [RFC5072]. > > (b) In a dual-stack environment with IPCP and IPV6CP running > over one PPP logical channel, the NCPs MUST be treated > as independent of each other and start and terminate > independently. It SHOULD be configurable to restart the > whole PPP session in the case of one NCP consistently > failing to come up. In any case, it's best to avoid a normative reference to PPPoE [RFC2516], because that is not an IETF standard, so will require some extra bureaucracy at the IESG approval stage. Brian From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 12:08:56 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DD943A6856 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:08:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.499 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WXAVzIYgUCFy for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:08:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACB043A6859 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:08:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTL5J-0002Fq-Ji for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 20:05:25 +0000 Received: from [209.85.220.225] (helo=mail-fx0-f225.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTL5D-0002Et-4x for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 20:05:19 +0000 Received: by fxm25 with SMTP id 25so12376987fxm.1 for ; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:05:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=9SDQUphYGph6ZapoajCBTnMMO0En1B5Zp17iqmcpFrA=; b=IXBIWt024rzy76mjeAlS98h/wKxVR3drCg0TPbSgqv0M9Fg4GoFY/N2+W9bFFQuiuE K9OiTK1Y9R2th5igKGLIk1JpdpgF/8NeSWDumasD+DYzHeJuhms+YB1+h2BYSyGxqTJx Yaf4L+hdpBnwDbjGiJnFFZPtXv0s4PcpctTlo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=PdW2J9AWOu0bQ+pb8eOR38fyqwx+AKOB9L4Y79SahXAIguKi3Jw5yYzCxoaryIepfX eYvJpiGHUcgU+8u1N4Pk8jsLf9qSMVH157YYkgSj/WEF/ECfsusF1AEaO+4diIMFlgD6 Js0dCE4GphoDPrCOBxUC2ZmnlrtsACWVuTbpM= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.29.193 with SMTP id r1mr2262257fac.29.1262981117303; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:05:17 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219161224.47262294@opy.nosense.org> <25cbe4fe1001080458x669f3e24m4e850907f7d25344@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 21:05:17 +0100 Message-ID: <25cbe4fe1001081205r759cb2f7s89f1a654838b211e@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt From: Eduard Metz To: "Wes Beebee (wbeebee)" Cc: Ole Troan , Mark Smith , IPv6 Operations Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Wes Beebee (wbeebee) wr= ote: >>> =A0 WPD-1b: >>> >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (a) =A0The IPv6 CE router MUST support DHCP prefix = delegation >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0requesting router behavior as specified = in [RFC3633] >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0(IA_PD option). >>> >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (b) =A0The IPv6 CE router MAY indicate as a hint to= the >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0delegating router the size of the prefix= it requires. >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0If so, it MUST ask for a prefix large en= ough to assign >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0one /64 for each of its interfaces round= ed up to the >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0nearest nibble and MUST be configurable = to ask for more. >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0The IPv6 CE router MUST be prepared to a= ccept a >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0delegated prefix size different from wha= t is given in >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0the hint. >> >>This may be getting a bit to fuzzy. I'd prefer something more along the l= ines of the original statement. >>Assuming the intention is to ensure that each IPv6 interface in the CE ro= uter can be configured with a >> /64, should the requirement not be that the CE router does not request (= or hint for) a prefix that is >> too small? (without going into saying how large it actually should be) >> >> Maybe this has been discussed before, but what is the desired behaviour = of the CE router in case the >> delegated prefix actually is too small to assign a /64 to each of its in= terfaces? > > I suspect that the behavior for a too small prefix would be vendor-depend= ent as I don't think that we could end up with recommending a specific beha= vior that would pass IETF consensus. =A0However, I think that asking for a = prefix large enough to do SLAAC, even if you don't get it, is behavior that= is completely reasonable and the right thing to do - but shouldn't be mand= ated. =A0Stating this hint in this document is a heads-up to service provid= ers to expect that some CE routers may have this behavior. =A0Therefore, I = agree with the text of WPD-1b as is - subject to possibly breaking up MAYs = and MUSTs as we're doing elsewhere in the document. > So it's a hint that some devices may provide hints ;-) .. this may be too s= ubtle I'd suggest to make it a more concise requirement. The first two parts to me are the core: The first part of WPD-1b describes the option of providing a hint on prefix size, this is already in RFC3633, but it can be restated here. The second part of WPD-1b relates the prefix hint to the CE interfaces. With regard to this I meant to say that -if- the CE router provides a hint, it should not hint for a prefix smaller than required to assign a /64 to each of its interfaces. So I think we agree here. The rest I think can (or even should) be left out: The third part seems to suggest a default value for hinted prefix size, based on number of interfaces, or manual configuration. This could be included as an example of how the prefix size could be determined, I do not think it should be part of the requirement. The last part of -1b is already described in RFC3633, for clarity may be good to restate, but not necessary. A question: is WPD-1b meant to apply to all DHCP messages in which the prefix length is specified by the requesting (CE) router? Or just the case of initial boot (no previously assigned prefix). If a prefix previously was assigned, I assume the CE router should include this as a hint, and not provide a hint according to WPD-1b? /Eduard > - Wes > From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 12:12:51 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C11F13A6835 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:12:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -107.864 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-107.864 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.865, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_32=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9P6bdZJL43i6 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:12:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F2A23A6816 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:12:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTL9T-0003Ar-SS for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 20:09:43 +0000 Received: from [171.68.10.86] (helo=sj-iport-4.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTL9L-00039s-2d for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 20:09:35 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-4.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AucGACcgR0urRN+J/2dsb2JhbACIJoEUuAyUCoQvBA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,243,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="72012601" Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.223.137]) by sj-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Jan 2010 20:09:34 +0000 Received: from dwingwxp01 ([10.32.240.197]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o08K9Y4B024881; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 20:09:34 GMT From: "Dan Wing" To: , Subject: CPE router learning DNS servers - comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03 Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:09:32 -0800 Message-ID: <119f01ca909e$7e489940$c5f0200a@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: AcqQnn4UrtGEOX2FQ4K6qFdt/qKVPQ== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: 1. I noticed draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router does not reference RFC5505, "Principles of Internet Host Configuration". Is that intentional? 2. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5505#page-11 says, in part: ... In IPv6, where link-layer-independent mechanisms such as stateless autoconfiguration [RFC4862] and stateless DHCPv6 [RFC3736] are available, PPP IPv6CP [RFC5072] configures an Interface-Identifier that is similar to a Media Access Control (MAC) address. This enables PPP IPv6CP to avoid duplicating DHCPv6 functionality. ... and I see that draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03 only says: L-6: The IPv6 CE router MUST support a DHCP server [RFC3315] on its LAN interfaces. It MAY support Stateless Dynamic Host ^^^ Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Service for IPv6 [RFC3736]. Why is that only a MAY? I mean, without the CE doing DHCPv6 towards the Service Provider's network, is there some other way the CE router learns the IPv6 network's DNS servers so it can propagate those DNS servers to hosts connecting to the CE router? (I hope the answer is not 'manual configuration'). -d From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 13:14:34 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44DD33A6892 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:14:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.524 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.524 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.075, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xtizt2VePbvy for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:14:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F5523A6859 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:14:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTM6o-000Chj-Oo for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 21:11:02 +0000 Received: from [171.68.10.86] (helo=sj-iport-4.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTM6i-000Cfr-Cq for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 21:10:56 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-4.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,244,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="72039685" Received: from sj-core-4.cisco.com ([171.68.223.138]) by sj-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Jan 2010 21:10:55 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com [72.163.62.138]) by sj-core-4.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o08LAtM7002602; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 21:10:55 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-201.cisco.com ([72.163.62.208]) by xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 15:10:55 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 15:10:54 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <25cbe4fe1001081205r759cb2f7s89f1a654838b211e@mail.gmail.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Thread-Index: AcqQneea4X9+33GtQC6QvHL3VC+3EgACCoRA References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219161224.47262294@opy.nosense.org> <25cbe4fe1001080458x669f3e24m4e850907f7d25344@mail.gmail.com> <25cbe4fe1001081205r759cb2f7s89f1a654838b211e@mail.gmail.com> From: "Wes Beebee (wbeebee)" To: "Eduard Metz" Cc: "Ole Troan" , "Mark Smith" , "IPv6 Operations" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Jan 2010 21:10:55.0746 (UTC) FILETIME=[1149AE20:01CA90A7] Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: > A question: is WPD-1b meant to apply to all DHCP messages in which the prefix length is specified by > the requesting (CE) router? Or just the case of initial boot (no previously assigned prefix). If a > prefix previously was assigned, I assume the CE router should include this as a hint, and not provide a > hint according to WPD-1b? Actually, I think that the CE router should provide the WPD-1b value as the hint either when first requesting it or renewing - and the SP is free to provide a different answer the second time. - Wes From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 13:15:46 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E9153A6892 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:15:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -108.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-108.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7gmB6CGxdq3c for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:15:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E65923A687C for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:15:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTM5U-000CTQ-CU for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 21:09:40 +0000 Received: from [171.71.176.72] (helo=sj-iport-3.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTM5L-000CPB-84 for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 21:09:31 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-3.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-Files: IPv6_workshop_agenda_v2.doc : 52736 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,244,1262563200"; d="doc'32?scan'32,208,32";a="206928492" Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com ([171.71.177.254]) by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Jan 2010 21:09:30 +0000 Received: from stealth-10-32-244-220.cisco.com (stealth-10-32-244-220.cisco.com [10.32.244.220]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o08L9RnB010539; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 21:09:27 GMT Message-Id: <1FE1D2FD-FB6D-40D1-9288-B26D9A4B172A@cisco.com> From: Fred Baker To: 3gv6@ietf.org, int-area@ietf.org, IPv6 Operations Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=Apple-Mail-211--937558550 Subject: CFP: IETF/3GPP Workshop on IPv4->IPv6 Coexistence and Transition in 3GPP Networks Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:09:26 -0800 Cc: "Bertenyi, Balazs (NSN - HU/Budapest)" , Jari Arkko , "ext Hietalahti Hannu (Nokia-CIC/Oulu)" , Hui Deng , Maurice Pope X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936) Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --Apple-Mail-211--937558550 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Attached is the call for contributions to a workshop on IPv4->IPv6 Coexistence and Transition. The workshop, hosted by China Mobile, is planned for 1-2 March 2010 in San Francisco. Venue, travel, and visa details are being finalized and will be announced when ready. IETF participants may post internet drafts and then forward the announcement from the internet draft service to Maurice Pope, as described in the CFP. --Apple-Mail-211--937558550 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=IPv6_workshop_agenda_v2.doc Content-Type: application/msword; x-unix-mode=0644; name="IPv6_workshop_agenda_v2.doc" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 0M8R4KGxGuEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPgADAP7/CQAGAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAAAAYgAAAAAAAAAA EAAAZAAAAAEAAAD+////AAAAAGEAAAD///////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////s pcEAJWAJBAAA+BK/AAAAAAAAEAAAAAAABgAAExQAAA4AYmpiaiJ4IngAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAJBBYAMjQAAEASAQBAEgEAoQsAAAAAAABxAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD//w8AAAAA AAAAAAD//w8AAAAAAAAAAAD//w8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKQAAAAAAGoJAAAAAAAAagkAAGoJ AAAAAAAAagkAAAAAAABqCQAAAAAAAGoJAAAAAAAAagkAABQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH4JAAAAAAAARhoA AAAAAABGGgAAAAAAAEYaAAA4AAAAfhoAACwAAACqGgAATAAAAH4JAAAAAAAARlQAABgCAAACGwAA XgAAAGAbAAAAAAAAYBsAAAAAAABgGwAAAAAAAGAbAAAAAAAAPxwAAAAAAAA/HAAAAAAAAD8cAAAA AAAAxVMAAAIAAADHUwAAAAAAAMdTAAAAAAAAx1MAAAAAAADHUwAAAAAAAMdTAAAAAAAAx1MAACQA AABeVgAAaAIAAMZYAADeAAAA61MAABUAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAagkAAAAAAAA/HAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA7HAAABAAAAD8cAAAAAAAAPxwAAAAAAAA/HAAAAAAAAOtTAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAABqCQAAAAAAAGoJAAAAAAAAYBsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGAbAADbAAAAAFQAABYAAABJ IAAAAAAAAEkgAAAAAAAASSAAAAAAAAA/HAAA+gAAAGoJAAAAAAAAYBsAAAAAAABqCQAAAAAAAGAb AAAAAAAAxVMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADkgAAAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPxwAAAAAAADFUwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASSAAAAAAAABJIAAA TgIAAGlOAACoAQAAagkAAAAAAABqCQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAJVEAAAAAAABgGwAAAAAAAPYaAAAMAAAAwNyU0V6Q ygEAAAAAAAAAAEYaAAAAAAAAOR0AANIBAAARUAAAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACVMAALwAAAAWVAAAMAAA AEZUAAAAAAAAQVAAAOQAAACkWQAAAAAAAAsfAADEAAAApFkAAGAAAAAlUQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAl UQAAbAAAAKRZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABqCQAAAAAAAJFRAAB4AQAAPxwAAAAAAAA/HAAAAAAAACcg AAASAAAAPxwAAAAAAAA/HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPxwA AAAAAAA/HAAAAAAAAD8cAAAAAAAA61MAAAAAAADrUwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAzx8AAFgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD8cAAAA AAAAPxwAAAAAAAA/HAAAAAAAAEZUAAAAAAAAPxwAAAAAAAA/HAAAAAAAAD8cAAAAAAAAPxwAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAH4JAAAAAAAAfgkAAAAAAAB+CQAAJAkAAKISAACkBwAAfgkAAAAAAAB+CQAAAAAA AH4JAAAAAAAAohIAAAAAAAB+CQAAAAAAAH4JAAAAAAAAfgkAAAAAAABqCQAAAAAAAGoJAAAAAAAA agkAAAAAAABqCQAAAAAAAGoJAAAAAAAAagkAAAAAAAD/////AAAAAAIADAEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA1UaXRs ZToJCUFnZW5kYSBmb3IgdGhlIElFVEYtM0dQUCBXb3Jrc2hvcCBvbiBJUHY2IGluIGNlbGx1bGFy IG5ldHdvcmtzDUFnZW5kYSBJdGVtOiAJMg1Tb3VyY2U6IAkJV29ya3Nob3AgQ2hhaXJtZW4gIChG cmVkIEJha2VyLCBCYWxhenMgQmVydGVueWkpDV9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0NVGhlIG92 ZXJhbGwgZ29hbCBvZiB0aGlzIHdvcmtzaG9wIGlzIHRvIGFsbG93IGV4cGVydHMgZnJvbSBib3Ro IDNHUFAgYW5kIElFVEYgdG8gZGlzY3VzcyBJUHY2IGRlcGxveW1lbnQgaW4gdGhlIGNvbnRleHQg b2YgM0dQUCBjZWxsdWxhciBuZXR3b3Jrcy4NDUlucHV0IGNvbnRyaWJ1dGlvbnMgbWF5IGJlIHN1 Ym1pdHRlZCBhcyBJbnRlcm5ldCBEcmFmdHMgYXQgaHR0cDovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9pZC1pbmZv LCBvciBtYXkgYmUgZW1haWxlZCBkaXJlY3RseSB0byB0aGUgc2VjcmV0YXJ5IG9mIHRoZSB3b3Jr c2hvcCwgTXIgTWF1cmljZSBQb3BlICggEyBIWVBFUkxJTksgIm1haWx0bzpNYXVyaWNlLlBvcGVA ZXRzaS5vcmciIAEUTWF1cmljZS5Qb3BlQGV0c2kub3JnFSApLiBBdXRob3JzIHN1Ym1pdHRpbmcg dGhlaXIgaW5wdXQgcGFwZXJzIGFzIElFVEYgRHJhZnRzIHNob3VsZCBzZW5kIGFuIGVtYWlsIHRv IE1hdXJpY2UgcHJvdmlkaW5nIGEgbGluayB0byB0aGVpciBkb2N1bWVudC4NTWF1cmljZSB3aWxs IGFsbG9jYXRlIGEgZG9jdW1lbnQgbnVtYmVyIGZvciBlYWNoIGlucHV0IHBhcGVyLCBhbmQgd2ls bCBzdG9yZSBhbGwgd29ya3Nob3AgZG9jdW1lbnRzIHVuZGVyIBMgSFlQRVJMSU5LICJodHRwOi8v d3d3LjNncHAub3JnL2Z0cC93b3Jrc2hvcC8yMDEwLTAzLTAxX0lQdjQtdG8tSVB2Nl93aXRoLUlF VEYvRG9jcyIgARRodHRwOi8vd3d3LjNncHAub3JnL2Z0cC93b3Jrc2hvcC8yMDEwLTAzLTAxX0lQ djQtdG8tSVB2Nl93aXRoLUlFVEYvRG9jcxUuIA0NVGhlIGlucHV0IHNob3VsZCBiZSBhdmFpbGFi bGUgYXMgc29vbiBhcyBwb3NzaWJsZSBzbyB0aGF0IGRpc2N1c3Npb24gY2FuIHRha2UgcGxhY2Ug aW4gdGhlIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdCBwcmlvciB0byB0aGUgd29ya3Nob3AgYXQgEyBIWVBFUkxJTksg Imh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vM2d2NiIgARRodHRwczovL3d3 dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvLzNndjYVLiANDVRoZSBsYXRlc3QgdmVyc2lvbiBv ZiAzR1BQIFRSIDIzLjk3NSB0byBiZSB1c2VkIGFzIGEgYmFzaXMgZm9yIHRoZSB3b3Jrc2hvcCB3 aWxsIGJlIGF2YWlsYWJsZSBieSAyOS9KYW51YXJ5LCBhbmQgd2lsbCBiZSBzdWJtaXR0ZWQgdG8g dGhlIGRvY3VtZW50IGRpcmVjdG9yeSATIEhZUEVSTElOSyAiaHR0cDovL3d3dy4zZ3BwLm9yZy9m dHAvd29ya3Nob3AvMjAxMC0wMy0wMV9JUHY0LXRvLUlQdjZfd2l0aC1JRVRGL0RvY3MiIAEUaHR0 cDovL3d3dy4zZ3BwLm9yZy9mdHAvd29ya3Nob3AvMjAxMC0wMy0wMV9JUHY0LXRvLUlQdjZfd2l0 aC1JRVRGL0RvY3MVLiANDVRoZSBmaW5hbCBkZWFkbGluZSBmb3IgaW5wdXQgZG9jdW1lbnRzIGlz IEZlYnJ1YXJ5IDEydGgsIDIwMTAuIA0NVGhlIFRhYmxlIGJlbG93IHNob3dzIHRoZSBhZ2VuZGEg Zm9yIHRoZSB3b3Jrc2hvcC4gVGhlIFRhYmxlIHdpbGwgYmUgdXBkYXRlZCB3aXRoIHRoZSBsaXN0 IG9mIGlucHV0IGRvY3VtZW50cyBmb3IgZWFjaCBhZ2VuZGEgaXRlbSBhZnRlciB0aGUgc3VibWlz c2lvbiBkZWFkbGluZS4gDQ0xB09wZW5pbmcgb2YgdGhlIFdvcmtzaG9wIC0gMDk6MDAgb24gTW9u ZGF5IDEvTWFyY2gNV2VsY29tZSBzcGVlY2ggZnJvbSB0aGUgaG9zdA1Eb2N1bWVudCBsaXN0OiBJ UDYtMTB4eHh4LIUNIAcHMgdBcHByb3ZhbCBvZiB0aGUgYWdlbmRhDURvY3VtZW50IGxpc3Q6IElQ Ni0xMDAwMDENBwczB0lQdjYgZGVwbG95bWVudHMgliBvcGVyYXRpb25hbCBleHBlcmllbmNlIGFu ZCBzdGF0ZSBvZiB0aGUgYXJ0IA1Eb2N1bWVudCBsaXN0OiBJUDYtMTB4eHh4LIUNBwc0B1Jldmll dyBvZiBJUHY2IGRlcGxveW1lbnQgc2NlbmFyaW9zDVZhbGlkaXR5IG9mIHNjZW5hcmlvcyBjYXB0 dXJlZCBpbiAzR1BQIFRSIDIzLjk3NSAoYW5kIHBvc3NpYmxlIG90aGVycykgc2hvdWxkIGJlIGV2 YWx1YXRlZC4NVGhlIGdvYWwgaXMgdG8gY29tZSB0byBhIGxpc3Qgb2YgdmFsaWRhdGVkIHNjZW5h cmlvcyB0byBiZSB1c2VkIGFzIGEgYmFzaXMgZm9yIGRpc2N1c3Npb24gb24gc29sdXRpb25zLg1E b2N1bWVudCBsaXN0OiBJUDYtMTB4eHh4LIUNBwc1B1JldmlldyBvZiBJUHY2IHRyYW5zaXRpb24g c29sdXRpb25zIGFuZCBnYXAgYW5hbHlzaXMNVGhlIGdvYWwgaXMgdG8gaWRlbnRpZnkgdG9vbHMg ZmFjaWxpdGF0aW5nIHRoZSBzY2VuYXJpb3MgYWdyZWVkIHVuZGVyIDQsIGFuZCBpZGVudGlmeSBn YXBzIHRoYXQgdGhlIGN1cnJlbnQgdG9vbCBzZXQgaGFzIGluIHN1cHBvcnRpbmcgdGhlbS4NRG9j dW1lbnQgbGlzdDogSVA2LTEweHh4eCyFDQcHNgdTdW1tYXJ5IGFuZCB3YXkgZm9yd2FyZA1Eb2N1 bWVudCBsaXN0OiBJUDYtMTB4eHh4LIUNBwc3B0Nsb3NlIG9mIHRoZSBXb3Jrc2hvcCAtIE5vIGxh dGVyIHRoYW4gMTc6MDAgb24gVHVlc2RheSAyL01hcmNoDUEgcmVwb3J0IG9mIHRoZSBjb25jbHVz aW9ucyBmcm9tIHRoZSB3b3Jrc2hvcCB3aWxsIGJlIHBvc3RlZCBhcyBhbiBJbnRlcm5ldCBEcmFm dC4gVGhlIGRyYWZ0IHdpbGwgYWxzbyBiZSBhdmFpbGFibGUgYXQgEyBIWVBFUkxJTksgImh0dHA6 Ly93d3cuM2dwcC5vcmcvZnRwL3dvcmtzaG9wLzIwMTAtMDMtMDFfSVB2NC10by1JUHY2X3dpdGgt SUVURi9SZXBvcnQiIAEUaHR0cDovL3d3dy4zZ3BwLm9yZy9mdHAvd29ya3Nob3AvMjAxMC0wMy0w MV9JUHY0LXRvLUlQdjZfd2l0aC1JRVRGL1JlcG9ydBUuDURvY3VtZW50IGxpc3Q6IElQNi0xMHh4 eHgshQ0HBw0DDQ0EDQ0DDQ0EDQ1JRVRGLTNHUFAgV29ya3Nob3Agb24gSVB2NiBpbiBjZWxsdWxh ciBuZXR3b3JrcwkgSVA2LTEweHh4eA1TYW4gRnJhbmNpc2NvLCBVU0EsIDEgliAyIE1hcmNoLCAy MDEwDQ0NDQ0AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYAAAEIAAAJCAAA MggAAEcIAABICAAAVggAAFcIAABgCAAAYggAAHQIAACSCAAAkwgAAOEIAADiCAAAdwkAAHgJAACL CQAAjgkAAJ8JAADNCQAA1QkAANkJAADhCQAA6gkAAB4KAAAfCgAASQoAAEoKAABLCgAAYAoAAGEK AABlCgAAsgoAALoKAADmCgAAKwsAAC8LAAA4CwAAQgsAAEgLAABJCwAAngsAAJ8LAACgCwAA5wsA AOgLAADrCwAAVAwAAGoMAABsDAAAbQwAAG4MAACmDAAA9O3n4djO4c7Y5+Hnyu3Gwsa+wre+wsbC xq/GpK+br8bCxsLGl8KXxq/GjK+br5fGl8aXr8YAAAAAAAAAAAAAABUCCIEDatsAAAAGCAEWaEt+ pQBVCAEGFmhtCtkAABAVaP0YJgAWaEt+pQAwShkAABUCCIEDagAAAAAGCAEWaEt+pQBVCAEPA2oA AAAAFmhLfqUAVQgBDBVobQrZABZoDAPWAAAGFmjnFqAAAAYWaAwD1gAABhZoS36lAAAGFmi2JH0A ABMVaLYkfQAWaLYkfQA1CIFeSgIAEBVotiR9ABZotiR9AF5KAgAAChZoS36lAF5KAgAAChZotiR9 AF5KAgAADRZotiR9ADUIgV5KAgAVFmi2JH0ANQiBXkoCAG5IEgR0SBIEADUABgAAAQgAAEgIAABY CAAAkwgAAOIIAADjCAAAdgkAAHcJAADeCgAA6wsAAOwLAADWDAAA1wwAABcOAAAYDgAAWA4AAFkO AAD8DgAA/Q4AAP8OAAAxDwAATg8AAPoAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADtAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA7QAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD6AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA2wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADb AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA2wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADbAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA2wAAAAAA AAAAAAAAANsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADbAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA2wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANsAAAAAAAAAAAAA AADbAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA2wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAwAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANAAANxgUAAbYaABYkAUlmAQAAAGdk2zUaAAkA ABYkAUlmAQAAAGdk2zUaAAAEAABnZBs5yAAABAAAZ2RLfqUAAAwAAA+EigURhHb6XoSKBWCEdvpn ZEt+pQAADAAAD4SKBRGEdvpehIoFYIR2+mdktiR9AAAEAABnZLYkfQAAFgAGAAChEwAAEhQAAP39 AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAQAAQECpgwAAKcMAACoDAAA0gwA ANMMAADUDAAA1gwAAHQNAAB1DQAAyg0AAMsNAADMDQAAEw4AABQOAAAXDgAAIg4AACsOAAA/DgAA Qg4AAFUOAABXDgAAjA4AAPsOAAD8DgAA/Q4AAA4PAAAPDwAAFg8AABcPAAAYDwAAGQ8AACgPAAAx DwAATg8AAGMPAAD07OPs39vXz9fEz7vP19/b39ux29+t36aclY6clZx+cWVcAAAAAAAAAAAAABAV aBs5yAAWaLBahwBDShQAABYVaLBahwAWaBs5yAA2CIFDShQAXAiBABkWaBs5yAA1CIFCKgZDShQA XAiBcGj/AAAAHxVoamORABZoGznIADUIgUIqBkNKFABcCIFwaP8AAAANFmgbOcgANQiBQ0oUAA0W aKdhMQA1CIFDShQAExVoamORABZoGznIADUIgUNKFAAMFmgbOcgANQiBPioBAAYWaBs5yAAAEhVo bQrZABZoS36lADUIgT4qAQAQFWj9GCYAFmiwWocAMEoZAAAVAgiBA2qRAwAABggBFmiwWocAVQgB DwNqAAAAABZosFqHAFUIAQYWaLBahwAABhZoS36lAAAGFmhtCtkAABAVaP0YJgAWaEt+pQAwShkA AA8DagAAAAAWaEt+pQBVCAEVAgiBA2pwAgAABggBFmhLfqUAVQgBACJODwAAag8AAGwPAABtDwAA bw8AAIYPAACgDwAAoQ8AAPYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADpAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAawAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGIA AAAAAAAAAAAAAABiAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAACQAAFiQBSWYBAAAAZ2TbNRoAAH0AAGtkJgUAABYkARckAUlmAQAAAAKWbAAF1hgE AQAABAEAAAQBAAAEAQAABAEAAAQBAAAI1jAAApT/yAITJgAGNAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZL IwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKdAAA4AET1jAAAAD/BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAAAAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/BAEA AAAAAP8EAQAAAAAA/wQBAAAU9gEAABU2ARf2AwAAGPYDAAAa1ggAAAD/AAAA/xvWCAAAAP8AAAD/ HNYIAAAA/wAAAP8d1ggAAAD/AAAA/zTWBgABBQMAADTWBgABCgNsAGH2AwAAeXTbNRoADQAADcYF AAG2GgAWJAFJZgEAAABnZNs1GgAJAAAWJAFJZgEAAABnZLBahwAAB2MPAABqDwAAaw8AAGwPAABt DwAAhQ8AAIYPAACfDwAAoA8AAKEPAACiDwAAow8AAKQPAADkDwAA+Q8AAAAQAAABEAAAAhAAAAMQ AAAEEAAADhAAAB4QAAAoEAAA6xAAAOwQAAABEQAACBEAAAkRAAAKEQAACxEAAAwRAABAEQAAQREA AIoRAADMEQAAzREAAM4RAADjEQAA6hEAAOsRAADsEQAA7REAAO4RAAD68+nj2dLJ48njwrjCr/q4 +qjZ0sLSnvqv+pXjqNmo0o6EjoR7dWvjqNkTFWhqY5EAFminYTEANQiBQ0oUAAoWaKdhMQBDShQA ABAVaBs5yAAWaKdhMQBDShQAABMVaKdhMQAWaKdhMQA2CIFDShQADRZop2ExADYIgUNKFAAQFWiw WocAFmiwWocAQ0oUAAATFWiwWocAFmiwWocANgiBQ0oUAA0WaKdhMQA1CIFDShQAEBVoGznIABZo sFqHAENKFAAAExVoamORABZosFqHADUIgUNKFAANFmiwWocANQiBQ0oUABAVaBs5yAAWaBs5yABD ShQAAA0WaBs5yAA1CIFDShQAExVoamORABZoGznIADUIgUNKFAAKFmgbOcgAQ0oUAAATFWgbOcgA FmgbOcgAQ0oUAFwIgQ0WaBs5yABDShQAXAiBChZosFqHAENKFAAqoQ8AAKIPAACkDwAA5A8AAAAQ AAABEAAAfwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAB2AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAbQAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AHYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAJAAAWJAFJZgEAAABnZLBahwAJAAAWJAFJZgEA AABnZNs1GgAAfwAAa2S+BQAAFiQBFyQBSWYBAAAAApZsAAXWGAQBAAAEAQAABAEAAAQBAAAEAQAA BAEAAAeUzAEI1jAAApT/yAITJgAGNAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZLIwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAKdAAA4AET1jAAAAD/BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAAAAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAAAAAA/wQB AAAU9gEAABU2ARf2AwAAGPYDAAAa1ggAAAD/AAAA/xvWCAAAAP8AAAD/HNYIAAAA/wAAAP8d1ggA AAD/AAAA/zTWBgABBQMAADTWBgABCgNsAGH2AwAAeXTbNRoAAAUBEAAAAhAAAAQQAAAoEAAAhBAA AOwQAAAIEQAACREAAH8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAB2AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAdgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHYAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAB2AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAbQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAkAABYkAUlmAQAAAGdksFqHAAkAABYkAUlmAQAA AGdk2zUaAAB/AABrZFoGAAAWJAEXJAFJZgEAAAAClmwABdYYBAEAAAQBAAAEAQAABAEAAAQBAAAE AQAAB5TMAQjWMAAClP/IAhMmAAY0AwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABksjAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAp0AADgARPWMAAAAP8EAQAAAAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAAAAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/BAEA ABT2AQAAFTYBF/YDAAAY9gMAABrWCAAAAP8AAAD/G9YIAAAA/wAAAP8c1ggAAAD/AAAA/x3WCAAA AP8AAAD/NNYGAAEFAwAANNYGAAEKA2wAYfYDAAB5dNs1GgAABwkRAAAKEQAADBEAAEERAADOEQAA 6hEAAOsRAACBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAeAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAB4AAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAbwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAkAABYkAUlmAQAAAGdkp2ExAAkAABYkAUlm AQAAAGdk2zUaAAB9AABrZPYGAAAWJAEXJAFJZgEAAAAClmwABdYYBAEAAAQBAAAEAQAABAEAAAQB AAAEAQAACNYwAAKU/8gCEyYABjQDAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGSyMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA CnQAAOABE9YwAAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAAAAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAA FPYBAAAVNgEX9gMAABj2AwAAGtYIAAAA/wAAAP8b1ggAAAD/AAAA/xzWCAAAAP8AAAD/HdYIAAAA /wAAAP801gYAAQUDAAA01gYAAQoDbABh9gMAAHl02zUaAAAG6xEAAOwRAADuEQAABhIAACISAAAj EgAAgQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAB4AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAeAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHgA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACQAAFiQBSWYB AAAAZ2TbNRoAAH0AAGtkjgcAABYkARckAUlmAQAAAAKWbAAF1hgEAQAABAEAAAQBAAAEAQAABAEA AAQBAAAI1jAAApT/yAITJgAGNAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZLIwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAK dAAA4AET1jAAAAD/BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAAAAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAAAAAA/wQBAAAU 9gEAABU2ARf2AwAAGPYDAAAa1ggAAAD/AAAA/xvWCAAAAP8AAAD/HNYIAAAA/wAAAP8d1ggAAAD/ AAAA/zTWBgABBQMAADTWBgABCgNsAGH2AwAAeXTbNRoAAAXuEQAABRIAAAYSAAAbEgAAIhIAACMS AAAkEgAAJRIAADMSAABMEgAAThIAAFUSAABkEgAAZRIAANwSAADdEgAA6RIAADITAAA0EwAANRMA ADYTAAB/EwAAgBMAAIITAACXEwAAnhMAAJ8TAACgEwAAoRMAAKITAACkEwAApRMAAPjx6OLY0vjI +Luru56UiIGUgW+IY4iB6OKU0lxUUFQABhZom1WgAAAPA2oAAAAAFmibVaAAVQgBDBVoS36lABZo S36lAAAXFWj9GCYAFminYTEAMEoZADYIgUNKFAAiAgiBA2q+CAAABggBFWj9GCYAFminYTEANgiB Q0oUAFUIAQANFminYTEANgiBQ0oUABYDagAAAAAWaKdhMQA2CIFDShQAVQgBABMVaKdhMQAWaKdh MQA2CIFDShQAGRZoGznIADUIgUIqBkNKFABcCIFwaP8AAAAfFWgWDpAAFmgbOcgANQiBQioGQ0oU AFwIgXBo/wAAABkWaKdhMQA1CIFCKgZDShQAXAiBcGj/AAAAExVoFg6QABZoGznIADUIgUNKFAAK FmgbOcgAQ0oUAAATFWhqY5EAFminYTEANQiBQ0oUAAoWaKdhMQBDShQAABAVaBs5yAAWaKdhMQBD ShQAAA0WaBs5yAA1CIFDShQADRZop2ExADUIgUNKFAAAHyMSAAAkEgAAJhIAAGUSAACCEwAAnhMA AJ8TAACBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAeAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABrAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA awAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANAAANxgUAASgaABYkAUlmAQAAAGdk2zUaAAkAABYkAUlmAQAA AGdk2zUaAAB9AABrZCYIAAAWJAEXJAFJZgEAAAAClmwABdYYBAEAAAQBAAAEAQAABAEAAAQBAAAE AQAACNYwAAKU/8gCEyYABjQDAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGSyMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACnQA AOABE9YwAAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAAAAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAAFPYB AAAVNgEX9gMAABj2AwAAGtYIAAAA/wAAAP8b1ggAAAD/AAAA/xzWCAAAAP8AAAD/HdYIAAAA/wAA AP801gYAAQUDAAA01gYAAQoDbABh9gMAAHl02zUaAAAGnxMAAKATAAChEwAAoxMAAKQTAACmEwAA pxMAAKkTAACqEwAArBMAAK0TAADpEwAAgQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAB/AAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAfwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAB/AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAfwAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AH8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAB/AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAfwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACAAADcYFAAGnJQJnZOcW oAAAAQAAAH0AAGtkWwoAABYkARckAUlmAQAAAAKWbAAF1hgEAQAABAEAAAQBAAAEAQAABAEAAAQB AAAI1jAAApT/yAITJgAGNAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZLIwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKdAAA 4AET1jAAAAD/BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAAAAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAAAAAA/wQBAAAU9gEA ABU2ARf2AwAAGPYDAAAa1ggAAAD/AAAA/xvWCAAAAP8AAAD/HNYIAAAA/wAAAP8d1ggAAAD/AAAA /zTWBgABBQMAADTWBgABCgNsAGH2AwAAeXTbNRoAAAulEwAApxMAAKgTAACqEwAAqxMAAK0TAADo EwAA6RMAAA8UAAARFAAAEhQAABMUAAD89Pz0/OfUyMT8vQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMFWhLfqUAFmhLfqUAAAYWaKFfnwAAFhZooV+fAENKGABhShgAbUgJBHNICQQA JBZooV+fADUIgUNKGABhShgAbUgJBG5IEgRvKAFzSAkEdEgSBAAZFmihX58ANQiBQ0oYAGFKGABt SAkEc0gJBA8DagAAAAAWaJtVoABVCAEGFmibVaAAC+kTAAAPFAAAEBQAABEUAAASFAAAExQAAO4A AAAAAAAAAAAAAADsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA6gAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAOoAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADqAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAAAAARoAEQIADcYF AAGnJQImZAQBAAFQxggAAAD/BAEBAGdk5xagAAAFMAAmUAkAHFABAB+wgy4gsMhBIbBuBCKwbgQj kG4EJJBuBCWwAAAXsKgCGLCoAgyQ0AIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADbAAAARAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADQyep5+brOEYyCAKoAS6kL AgAAABcAAAAWAAAATQBhAHUAcgBpAGMAZQAuAFAAbwBwAGUAQABlAHQAcwBpAC4AbwByAGcAAADg yep5+brOEYyCAKoAS6kLOgAAAG0AYQBpAGwAdABvADoATQBhAHUAcgBpAGMAZQAuAFAAbwBwAGUA QABlAHQAcwBpAC4AbwByAGcAAACVAQAARAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADQyep5+brOEYyCAKoAS6kLAgAAABcAAABI AAAAaAB0AHQAcAA6AC8ALwB3AHcAdwAuADMAZwBwAHAALgBvAHIAZwAvAGYAdABwAC8AdwBvAHIA awBzAGgAbwBwAC8AMgAwADEAMAAtADAAMwAtADAAMQBfAEkAUAB2ADQALQB0AG8ALQBJAFAAdgA2 AF8AdwBpAHQAaAAtAEkARQBUAEYALwBEAG8AYwBzAAAA4Mnqefm6zhGMggCqAEupC5AAAABoAHQA dABwADoALwAvAHcAdwB3AC4AMwBnAHAAcAAuAG8AcgBnAC8AZgB0AHAALwB3AG8AcgBrAHMAaABv AHAALwAyADAAMQAwAC0AMAAzAC0AMAAxAF8ASQBQAHYANAAtAHQAbwAtAEkAUAB2ADYAXwB3AGkA dABoAC0ASQBFAFQARgAvAEQAbwBjAHMAAAAhAQAARAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADQyep5+brOEYyCAKoAS6kLAgAA ABcAAAArAAAAaAB0AHQAcABzADoALwAvAHcAdwB3AC4AaQBlAHQAZgAuAG8AcgBnAC8AbQBhAGkA bABtAGEAbgAvAGwAaQBzAHQAaQBuAGYAbwAvADMAZwB2ADYAAADgyep5+brOEYyCAKoAS6kLVgAA AGgAdAB0AHAAcwA6AC8ALwB3AHcAdwAuAGkAZQB0AGYALgBvAHIAZwAvAG0AYQBpAGwAbQBhAG4A LwBsAGkAcwB0AGkAbgBmAG8ALwAzAGcAdgA2AAAAlQEAAEQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA0Mnqefm6zhGMggCqAEup CwIAAAAXAAAASAAAAGgAdAB0AHAAOgAvAC8AdwB3AHcALgAzAGcAcABwAC4AbwByAGcALwBmAHQA cAAvAHcAbwByAGsAcwBoAG8AcAAvADIAMAAxADAALQAwADMALQAwADEAXwBJAFAAdgA0AC0AdABv AC0ASQBQAHYANgBfAHcAaQB0AGgALQBJAEUAVABGAC8ARABvAGMAcwAAAODJ6nn5us4RjIIAqgBL qQuQAAAAaAB0AHQAcAA6AC8ALwB3AHcAdwAuADMAZwBwAHAALgBvAHIAZwAvAGYAdABwAC8AdwBv AHIAawBzAGgAbwBwAC8AMgAwADEAMAAtADAAMwAtADAAMQBfAEkAUAB2ADQALQB0AG8ALQBJAFAA dgA2AF8AdwBpAHQAaAAtAEkARQBUAEYALwBEAG8AYwBzAAAAlgAWJAEXJAFJZgEAAAABlgAAIXYA AmgBNdYFAAEDNAM11gUBAgNLIyN2AAE0AyN2AQJLIzpWCwAClmwACnQAAOABE9YwAAAA/wQBAAAA AAD/BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAAAAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAAFPYBAAAVNgEY9gMAADXWBQAB AzQDNdYFAQIDSyN5dNs1GgCaABYkARckAUlmAQAAAAGWAAAhdgACaAE11gUAAQM0AzXWBQECA0sj I3YAATQDI3YBAksjOlYLAAKWbAAHlMwBCnQAAOABE9YwAAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAA AAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAAFPYBAAAVNgEY9gMAADXWBQABAzQDNdYFAQIDSyN5dNs1 GgCaABYkARckAUlmAQAAAAGWAAAhdgACaAE11gUAAQM0AzXWBQECA0sjI3YAATQDI3YBAksjOlYL AAKWbAAHlMwBCnQAAOABE9YwAAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAAAAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/BAEA AAAAAP8EAQAAFPYBAAAVNgEY9gMAADXWBQABAzQDNdYFAQIDSyN5dNs1GgCWABYkARckAUlmAQAA AAGWAAAhdgACaAE11gUAAQM0AzXWBQECA0sjI3YAATQDI3YBAksjOlYLAAKWbAAKdAAA4AET1jAA AAD/BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAAAAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAAAAAA/wQBAAAU9gEAABU2ARj2 AwAANdYFAAEDNAM11gUBAgNLI3l02zUaAJYAFiQBFyQBSWYBAAAAAZYAACF2AAJoATXWBQABAzQD NdYFAQIDSyMjdgABNAMjdgECSyM6VgsAApZsAAp0AADgARPWMAAAAP8EAQAAAAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/ BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAAAAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/BAEAABT2AQAAFTYBGPYDAAA11gUAAQM0AzXWBQECA0sj eXTbNRoAlgAWJAEXJAFJZgEAAAABlgAAIXYAAmgBNdYFAAEDNAM11gUBAgNLIyN2AAE0AyN2AQJL IzpWCwAClmwACnQAAOABE9YwAAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAAAAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/BAEA AAAAAP8EAQAAFPYBAAAVNgEY9gMAADXWBQABAzQDNdYFAQIDSyN5dNs1GgCdAQAARAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADQ yep5+brOEYyCAKoAS6kLAgAAABcAAABKAAAAaAB0AHQAcAA6AC8ALwB3AHcAdwAuADMAZwBwAHAA LgBvAHIAZwAvAGYAdABwAC8AdwBvAHIAawBzAGgAbwBwAC8AMgAwADEAMAAtADAAMwAtADAAMQBf AEkAUAB2ADQALQB0AG8ALQBJAFAAdgA2AF8AdwBpAHQAaAAtAEkARQBUAEYALwBSAGUAcABvAHIA dAAAAODJ6nn5us4RjIIAqgBLqQuUAAAAaAB0AHQAcAA6AC8ALwB3AHcAdwAuADMAZwBwAHAALgBv AHIAZwAvAGYAdABwAC8AdwBvAHIAawBzAGgAbwBwAC8AMgAwADEAMAAtADAAMwAtADAAMQBfAEkA UAB2ADQALQB0AG8ALQBJAFAAdgA2AF8AdwBpAHQAaAAtAEkARQBUAEYALwBSAGUAcABvAHIAdAAA AJYAFiQBFyQBSWYBAAAAAZYAACF2AAJoATXWBQABAzQDNdYFAQIDSyMjdgABNAMjdgECSyM6VgsA ApZsAAp0AADgARPWMAAAAP8EAQAAAAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/BAEAAAAAAP8EAQAAAAAA/wQBAAAAAAD/ BAEAABT2AQAAFTYBGPYDAAA11gUAAQM0AzXWBQECA0sjeXTbNRoAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAhgIcABIAAQCcAA8ABAAAAAMAAAAAAAQACAAAAAgAAAAIAAAA CAAAAAgAAAAIAAAACAAAAAgAAAAOAAAADgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAA4AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAI AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACAAAAAgA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARAAAQPH/AgBEAAwQAAAA AAAAAAAGAE4AbwByAG0AYQBsAAAAAgAAABwAQ0oWAE9KAgBRSgIAX0gBBG1ICQhzSAkIdEgJBGAA AUABAAIAYAAMEAAAAAAAAAAACQBIAGUAYQBkAGkAbgBnACAAMQAAACUAAQADJAMFJAEGJAEPhMUC EYQ7/RSk8ABAJgBehMUCYIQ7/WEkAwAOADUIgUNKGAB0SAkEdQgAPAACQAEAAgA8AAwQAAAAAAAA AAAJAEgAZQBhAGQAaQBuAGcAIAAyAAAACAACAAYkAUAmAQcANQiBQ0oUAAA+AANAAQACAD4ADBAA AAAAAAAAAAkASABlAGEAZABpAG4AZwAgADMAAAAIAAMABiQBQCYCCgA1CIFDShgAXAiBWgAEQAEA AgBaAAwQAAAAAAAAAAAJAEgAZQBhAGQAaQBuAGcAIAA0AAAAJQAEAAMkAwUkAQYkAQ+EigURhHb6 FKTwAEAmA16EigVghHb6YSQDAAcANQiBQ0oUAAA6AAVAAQACADoADBAAAAAAAAAAAAkASABlAGEA ZABpAG4AZwAgADUAAAAIAAUABiQBQCYEBgA1CIFcCIFCAAZAAQACAEIADBAAAAAAAAAAAAkASABl AGEAZABpAG4AZwAgADYAAAAIAAYABiQBQCYFDgA1CIFDShIAXAiBXkoCAFQAB0ABAAIAVAAMEAAA AAAAAAAACQBIAGUAYQBkAGkAbgBnACAANwAAAAgABwAGJAFAJgYfADUIgUIqAUNKEABcCIFeSgIA bkgRBHBoAAAAAHRIEQQAAAAAAEQAQUDy/6EARAAMAQAAAAAAAAAAFgBEAGUAZgBhAHUAbAB0ACAA UABhAHIAYQBnAHIAYQBwAGgAIABGAG8AbgB0AAAAAABWAGlA8/+zAFYADAUAAAAAAAAAAAwAVABh AGIAbABlACAATgBvAHIAbQBhAGwAAAAgADpWCwAX9gMAADTWBgABBQMAADTWBgABCgNsAGH2AwAA AgALAAAAKABrQPT/wQAoAAAFAAAAAAAAAAAHAE4AbwAgAEwAaQBzAHQAAAACAAwAAAAAAD4AJwCi APEAPgAMAQAAAAAAAAAAEQBDAG8AbQBtAGUAbgB0ACAAUgBlAGYAZQByAGUAbgBjAGUAAAAEAENK EABaABNAAQACAVoADQEAAAAAAAAAAAUAVABPAEMAIAAxAAAAKQAQAAUkAQ3GBQABjCQKDoQcAQ+E NwIRhMn9E6TwAF2EHAFehDcCYITJ/QALAENKFAB0SAkEdQgAAEAAHkABABIBQAAMAQAAAAAAAAAA DABDAG8AbQBtAGUAbgB0ACAAVABlAHgAdAAAAAIAEQALAENKFAB0SAkEdQgAADwAQkABACIBPAAM AAAAAAAAAAAACQBCAG8AZAB5ACAAVABlAHgAdAAAAAIAEgAOADUIgUNKEgBcCIFeSgIASABDQAEA MgFIAAwEAAAAAAAAAAAQAEIAbwBkAHkAIABUAGUAeAB0ACAASQBuAGQAZQBuAHQAAAAOABMAD4Qb ARSkeABehBsBAABAAGoAEQESAUAADAUAAAAAAAAAAA8AQwBvAG0AbQBlAG4AdAAgAFMAdQBiAGoA ZQBjAHQAAAACABQABgA1CIFcCIFIAJkAAQBSAUgADAUAAAAAAAAAAAwAQgBhAGwAbABvAG8AbgAg AFQAZQB4AHQAAAACABUAFABDShAAT0oEAFFKBABeSgQAYUoQAFIAUkABAGIBUgAMBAAAAAAAAAAA EgBCAG8AZAB5ACAAVABlAHgAdAAgAEkAbgBkAGUAbgB0ACAAMgAAABQAFgAPhBsBEmTgAQEAFKR4 AF6EGwEAAJQA/g/x/3IBlAAMAQAAAAAAAAAACgAgAFoAYwBoAG4AIABaAGMAaABuAAAANAAXAAMk AwYkAQ3GBQABUwMGD4RTAxGErfwTpDwAFKQ8ADckADgkAEgkAF6EUwNghK38YSQDMQBCKgJLSAIA T0oCAFBKBQBRSgIAXkoCAF9IAQRtSAkEbkgECHBoAAD/AHNICQR0SAQIADgA/k8RAIIBOAAMAAAA AAAAAAAABQBJAHQAZQBtADEAAAAPABgAAyQAFKR4AEAmCWEkAAADADUIgQA2AFVAogCRATYADAQA AEt+pQAAAAkASAB5AHAAZQByAGwAaQBuAGsAAAAMAD4qAUIqAnBoAAD/ADQAH0ABAKIBNAAMBAAA 5xagAAAABgBIAGUAYQBkAGUAcgAAAA0AGgANxggAAuAQwCEBAgAAADQAIEABALIBNAAMBAAA5xag AAAABgBGAG8AbwB0AGUAcgAAAA0AGwANxggAAuAQwCEBAgAAAAAAAAATDAAAGAAANAAAEgD///// AAAAAAEAAABIAAAAWAAAAJMAAADiAAAA4wAAAHYBAAB3AQAA3gIAAOsDAADsAwAA1gQAANcEAAAX BgAAGAYAAFgGAABZBgAA/AYAAP0GAAD/BgAAMQcAAE4HAABqBwAAbAcAAG0HAABvBwAAhgcAAKAH AAChBwAAogcAAKQHAADkBwAAAAgAAAEIAAACCAAABAgAACgIAACECAAA7AgAAAgJAAAJCQAACgkA AAwJAABBCQAAzgkAAOoJAADrCQAA7AkAAO4JAAAGCgAAIgoAACMKAAAkCgAAJgoAAGUKAACCCwAA ngsAAJ8LAACgCwAAoQsAAKMLAACkCwAApgsAAKcLAACpCwAAqgsAAKwLAACtCwAA6QsAAA8MAAAQ DAAAEQwAABQMAACYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAmAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIA8AAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAJgAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgDwAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAmAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIA8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAJgAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAPAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAACYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgDwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAmAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIA8AAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAJgAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAAAAAgAAAAAAAAAAAAACYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIAAAAAA AAAAAAAAmAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIAAAACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAJgAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAPAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAACYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgDwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAmAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIA8AAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAJgAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgDwAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAmAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIA8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAJgAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAAAAAgAAAAAAAAAAA AACYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgDwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAqUAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIA8AAAAAQAA0AAAAAAg AKkAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAPAAAAAEAANAAAAAAAACpAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgDwAAAABAADQAAAAAAAA qQAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIA8AAAAAQAAqAAAAAAAAKkAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAPAAAAAEAANAAAAAAIACZ QAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgDwAAAABAADUAAAAACAAqUAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIA8AAAAAQAAqAAAAAAgAKkA AAAAMAAAAAAAAACAPAAAAAEAAKgAAAAAAACpAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgDwAAAABAACoAAAAAAAAqQAA AAAwAAAAAAAAAIA8AAAAAQAAqAAAAAAgAJlAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAPAAAAAEAAKwAAAAAIACpAAAA ADAAAAAAAAAAgDwAAAABAADQAAAAACAAqQAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIA8AAAAAQAA0AAAAAAAAKkAAAAA MAAAAAAAAACAPAAAAAEAAKgAAAAAAACpAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgDwAAAABAADQAAAAACAAmQAAAAAw AAAAAAAAAIA8AAAAAQAA1AAAAAAgAKkAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAPAAAAAEAAKgAAAAAIACpAAAAADAA AAAAAAAAgDwAAAABAACoAAAAAAAAqQAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIA8AAAAAQAAqAAAAAAAAKkAAAAAMAAA AAAAAACAPAAAAAEAAKgAAAAAAACpAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgDwAAAABAACoAAAAAAAAqQAAAAAwAAAA AAAAAIA8AAAAAQAAqAAAAAAgAJkAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAPAAAAAEAAKwAAAAAIACpAAAAADAAAAAA AAAAgDwAAAABAADQAAAAACAAqQAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIA8AAAAAQAA0AAAAAAAAKkAAAAAMAAAAAAA AACAPAAAAAEAANAAAAAAAACpAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgDwAAAABAACoAAAAAAAAqQAAAAAwAAAAAAAA AIA8AAAAAQAA0AAAAAAgAJkAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAPAAAAAEAANQAAAAAIACpAAAAADAAAAAAAAAA gDwAAAABAADQAAAAACAAqQAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIA8AAAAAQAA0AAAAAAAAKkAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACA PAAAAAEAANAAAAAAAACpAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgDwAAAABAADQAAAAACAAmQAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIA8 AAAAAQAA1AAAAAAgAKkAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAPAAAAAEAANAAAAAAIACpAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgDwA AAABAADQAAAAAAAAqQAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIA8AAAAAQAA0AAAAAAAAKkAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAPAAA AAEAANAAAAAAAACpAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgDwAAAABAADQAAAAACAAmQAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIA8AAAA AQAA1AAAAAAgAJgAAAAAEAAAAAAAAACAAAAAgAAAAAAAAAAAAAGYQAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIAA AAAAAAAAAIAHWJEAMAAwAAAAAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACbB5hAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAAAAAgAAA AAAAAAAAgAdYkQAwADAAAAAAAAABAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAJsHmEAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIAAAACAAAAA AAAAAACAB1iRADAAMAAAAAAAAAEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAmweYQAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIAAAAAA AAAAAIAHWJEAMAAwAAAAAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACbB5hAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAAAAAgAAAAAAA AAAAAAcYQAAAAjAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAmEAAABowAAAAAAAAAIAAAACAAAAAAAAA AAAAAJhAAAAAMAAAAAAAAAIAAAACAAAACwAAABiXbQdYkQAwADAAAAAAAAABAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAo LJsHAAAAAAEAAABIAAAAWAAAAJMAAADiAAAA4wAAAHYBAAB3AQAA6wMAAOwDAADWBAAA1wQAABcG AAAYBgAAWAYAAFkGAAD8BgAA/QYAAP8GAAAxBwAATgcAAGoHAABsBwAAbQcAAG8HAACGBwAAoAcA AKEHAACiBwAApAcAAOQHAAAACAAAAQgAAAIIAAAECAAAKAgAAIQIAADsCAAACAkAAAkJAAAKCQAA DAkAAEEJAADOCQAA6gkAAOsJAADsCQAA7gkAAAYKAAAjCgAAJAoAACYKAABlCgAAggsAAJ8LAACg CwAAoQsAAOkLAAAPDAAAEAwAABQMAACaAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIAAAAAAAAAAAAAHmAAAAAAw AAAAAAAAAIAAAACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAJgAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAAAAAgAAAAAAAAAAAAACYAAAAADAA AAAAAAAAgAAAAIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAmAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIAAAACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAJgAAAAAMAAA AAAAAACAAAAAgAAAAAAAAAAAAACYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAmAAAAAAwAAAA AAAAAIAAAACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAJoAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAAAAAgAAAAAAAAAAAAAeaAAAAADAAAAAA AAAAgAAAAIAAAAAAAAAAAAAHmAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIAAAACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAJgAAAAAMAAAAAAA AACAAAAAgAAAAAAAAAAAAACYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAmAAAAAAwAAAAAAAA AIAAAACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAJgAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAAAAAgAAAAAAAAAAAAACYAAAAADAAAAAAAAAA gAAAAIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAmAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIAAAACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAJgAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACA AAAAgAAAAAAAAAAAAACpQAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIABAADQAAAAACAAqUAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIAA AACAAQAA0AAAAAAAAalAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAAAAAgAEAANAAAAAAAAFY0QAwHjAAAAAAAAABAAAA iwABAAAAAAAAAIABq0AAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIAAAACAAQAA0AAAAAAgB5lAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAAAAA gAEAANQAAAAAIACpQAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIABAADQAAAAACAAqUAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIAAAACA AQAA0AAAAAAAAalAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAAAAAgAEAANAAAAAAAAGpQAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIAB AADQAAAAACABmUAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIAAAACAAQAA1AAAAAAgAKkAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAAAAAgAEA ANAAAAAAIACpAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIABAADQAAAAAAAAqQAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIAAAACAAQAA 0AAAAAAAAKkAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAAAAAgAEAANAAAAAAIACZAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIABAADU AAAAACAAqQAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIAAAACAAQAA0AAAAAAgAKkAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAAAAAgAEAANAA AAAAAACpAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIABAADQAAAAAAAAqQAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIAAAACAAQAA0AAA AAAAAKkAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAAAAAgAEAANAAAAAAAACpAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIABAADQAAAA ACAAmQAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIAAAACAAQAA1AAAAAAgAKkAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAAAAAgAEAANAAAAAA IACpAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIABAADQAAAAAAAAqQAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIAAAACAAQAA0AAAAAAA AalAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAAAAAgAEAANAAAAAAAAGpAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIABAADQAAAAACAB mQAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIAAAACAAQAA1AAAAAAgAKkAAAAAMAAAAAAAAACAAAAAgAEAANAAAAAAIACp AAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIABAADQAAAAAAAAqwAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIAAAACAAQAA0AAAAAAgB5kA AAAAMAAAAAAAAACAAAAAgAEAANQAAAAAIACpAAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIABAADQAAAAACAAqQAA AAAwAAAAAAAAAIAAAACAAQAA0AAAAAAAAFiRADA6MAAAAAAAAAEAAAATAAEAAAAAAAAAgAGrAAAA ADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIABAADQAAAAACAHmQAAAAAwAAAAAAAAAIAAAACAAQAA1AAAAAAgAJoAAAAA EAAAAAAAAACAAAAAgAAAAAAAAACAAAeaQAAAADAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAIAAAAAAAAAAAAAHGEAAAAIw AAAAAAAAAIAAAACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZhAAAAaMAAAAAAAAACAAAAAgAAAAAAAAAAAAAEKAAAAADAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEyeEQAAAAAHAAAAAAMAAAAGAAAABgAAAAkAAAAMAAAADAAAAAwAAABwAAAA cAAAAHAAAABwAAAAcAAAAHMAAAAABgAApgwAAGMPAADuEQAApRMAABMUAAALAAAADgAAABAAAAAV AAAAGAAAAAAGAABODwAAoQ8AAAEQAAAJEQAA6xEAACMSAACfEwAA6RMAABMUAAAMAAAADwAAABEA AAASAAAAEwAAABQAAAAWAAAAFwAAABkAAAAABgAAEhQAAA0AAAAeAgAASgIAAGACAABIAwAAnwMA AOcDAABtBAAApwQAANIEAAB0BQAAywUAABMGAADcCgAANQsAAH8LAAATDAAAE1gU/xWAE1gU/xWA E1gU/xWAE1gU/xWEE1gU/xWADwAA8DgAAAAAAAbwGAAAAAIIAAACAAAAAwAAAAEAAAABAAAABAAA AEAAHvEQAAAA/////wAA/wCAgIAA9wAAEAAPAALwkgAAABAACPAIAAAAAQAAAAMEAAAPAAPwMAAA AA8ABPAoAAAAAQAJ8BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAgAK8AgAAAAABAAABQAAAA8ABPBCAAAA EgAK8AgAAAABBAAAAA4AAFMAC/AeAAAAvwEAABAAywEAAAAA/wEAAAgABAMJAAAAPwMBAAEAAAAR 8AQAAAABAAAAEwwAAAAAAAAAAAAAdwEAAHgBAACLAQAA2QEAAOEBAADqAQAAHgIAAGECAABlAgAA sgIAALoCAADmAgAALwMAADgDAABIAwAA6AMAAOsDAADrAwAAbQQAANMEAAD6BgAA+gYAAGsHAABr BwAA3AoAAIALAACgCwAAoQsAAKELAACjCwAAowsAAKQLAACkCwAApgsAAKcLAACpCwAAqgsAAKwL AAARDAAAFAwAAAQAAwAEAAMABAADAAQAAwAEAAMABAADAAQAAwAEAAMABAADAAQAAwAEAAMABAAD AAQAAwAEAAMABwAEAAcABAACAAQABwAEAAcABAAHAAQAAgAAAAAAAQAAAEcAAABIAAAAVwAAAFgA AACSAAAAkwAAAOEAAADjAAAAdQEAAHcBAADdAgAA3gIAAOoDAADsAwAA1QQAANcEAAAWBgAAGAYA AFcGAABZBgAA+wYAAP0GAAAwBwAAMQcAAE0HAABOBwAAaQcAAG0HAACFBwAAhgcAAJ8HAACiBwAA 4wcAAOQHAAD/BwAAAggAACcIAAAoCAAAgwgAAIQIAADrCAAA7AgAAAcJAAAKCQAAQAkAAEEJAADN CQAAzgkAAOkJAADsCQAABQoAAAYKAAAhCgAAJAoAAGQKAABlCgAAgQsAAIILAACdCwAAoQsAAKEL AACjCwAAowsAAKQLAACkCwAApgsAAKcLAACpCwAAqgsAAKwLAACtCwAA6AsAAOkLAAAODAAAEQwA ABQMAAAHAAUABwAFAAcABQAHAAUABwAFAAcABQAHAAUABwAFAAcABQAHAAUABwAFAAcABQAHAAUA BwAFAAcABQAHAAUABwAFAAcABQAHAAUABwAFAAcABQAHAAUABwAFAAcABQAHAAUABwAFAAcABQAH AAUABwAFAAcABQAHAAQABwAEAAIABAAHAAQABwAEAAcABAAFAAcABQAHAAIAAAAAAHwHAACFBwAA hgcAAJ8HAACiBwAApAcAAOQHAAAoCAAA7AgAAAwJAADOCQAA7gkAACQKAAAmCgAAggsAAJ0LAACh CwAAoQsAAKMLAACjCwAApAsAAKQLAACmCwAApwsAAKkLAACqCwAArAsAAK0LAADpCwAADwwAABEM AAAUDAAABwAFAAcABQAHAAUABwAFAAcABQAHAAUABwAFAAcABQAHAAQABwAEAAIABAAHAAQABwAE AAcABAAHAAUABwACAAAAAAChCwAAoQsAAKMLAACjCwAApAsAAKQLAACmCwAApwsAAKkLAACqCwAA rAsAAK0LAAARDAAAFAwAAAcABAAHAAQAAgAEAAcABAAHAAQABwAEAAcAAgAAAAAAFAwAAEDIug0I AAAADZEQAAAAAQAAAAQAAAAAAAIAFQAKSjsFjMAIW/8P/w//D/8P/w//D/8P/w//DwAAPTOyCB8A CQz/D/8P/w//D/8P/w//D/8P/w8AAHkLRhsfAAkM/w//D/8P/w//D/8P/w//D/8PAADaEEofZCnO Uv8P/w//D/8P/w//D/8P/w//DwAAMTMZLvraPjX/DwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABANMS2jbQLhhj /w8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQALdD857BlEOP8P/w//D/8P/w//D/8P/w//DwAAvy78OWC4NpX/ D/8P/w//D/8P/w//D/8P/w8QAM4lP0IPAAkM/w8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQBQE79EsNMMB/8P /w//D/8P/w//D/8P/w//DwAAOw0ZRcaUAp//D/8P/w//D/8P/w//D/8P/w8AAPE7h0tGv1y8/w8A AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQClF7hPTNfYsP8P/w//D/8P/w//D/8P/w//DwAAhj+1YCSjuI7/D/8P /w//D/8P/w//D/8P/w8AAGlMn21kKc5S/w//D/8P/w//D/8P/w//D/8PEAADCs5yso6QO/8P/w// D/8P/w//D/8P/w//DwAACVjWcnbtkC//D/8P/w//D/8P/w//D/8P/w8AAGA00Hd07p7p/w//D/8P /w//D/8P/w//D/8PEACQNYl69vueSv8PAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEArTJbe7QF+rv/D/8P/w// D/8P/w//D/8P/w8AAMFIMn0SvCir/w//D/8P/w//D/8P/w//D/8PEAAEAAAAAAABAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAADGAAAD4RXAxGEqfwVxgUAAVcDBl6EVwNghKn8bygAAQAAAAEAAAAAAAEDAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAMYAAAPhFcDEYSp/BXGBQABVwMGXoRXA2CEqfxvKAADAAAALgABAAEAAAAAAAED BQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMYAAAPhFcDEYSp/BXGBQABVwMGXoRXA2CEqfxvKAAFAAAALgABAC4A AgABAAAAAAABAwUHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADGAAAD4RXAxGEqfwVxgUAAVcDBl6EVwNghKn8bygA BwAAAC4AAQAuAAIALgADAAEAAAAAAAEDBQcJAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMYAAAPhDgEEYTI+xXGBQAB OAQGXoQ4BGCEyPtvKAAJAAAALgABAC4AAgAuAAMALgAEAAEAAAAAAAEDBQcJCwAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAMYAAAPhDgEEYTI+xXGBQABOAQGXoQ4BGCEyPtvKAALAAAALgABAC4AAgAuAAMALgAEAC4ABQAB AAAAAAABAwUHCQsNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADGAAAD4SgBRGEYPoVxgUAAaAFBl6EoAVghGD6bygADQAA AC4AAQAuAAIALgADAC4ABAAuAAUALgAGAAEAAAAAAAEDBQcJCw0PAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMYAAAPhKAF EYRg+hXGBQABoAUGXoSgBWCEYPpvKAAPAAAALgABAC4AAgAuAAMALgAEAC4ABQAuAAYALgAHAAEA AAAAAAEDBQcJCw0PEQAAAAAAAAAAAAMYAAAPhKAFEYRg+hXGBQABoAUGXoSgBWCEYPpvKAARAAAA LgABAC4AAgAuAAMALgAEAC4ABQAuAAYALgAHAC4ACAABAAAAFwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaAEAAAAAAAAL GAAAD4RoARGEmP4VxgUAAWgBBl6EaAFghJj+T0oBAFFKAQBvKAABALfwAQAAAAAAAQMAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAA+EGAMRhFD+FcYFAAEYAwZehBgDYIRQ/gQAAAAuAAEALgABAAAAAAABAwUA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGAAAD4TIBBGECP4VxgUAAaAFBl6EyARghAj+BgAAAC4AAQAuAAIALgAB AAAAAAABAwUHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGAAAD4TABhGEeP0VxgUAAXAIBl6EwAZghHj9CAAAAC4A AQAuAAIALgADAC4AAQAAAAAAAQMFBwkAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAA+EuAgRhOj8FcYFAAHYCQZe hLgIYITo/AoAAAAuAAEALgACAC4AAwAuAAQALgABAAAAAAABAwUHCQsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGAAA D4SwChGEWPwVxgUAAagMBl6EsApghFj8DAAAAC4AAQAuAAIALgADAC4ABAAuAAUALgABAAAAAAAB AwUHCQsNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGAAAD4SoDBGEyPsVxgUAARAOBl6EqAxghMj7DgAAAC4AAQAuAAIA LgADAC4ABAAuAAUALgAGAC4AAQAAAAAAAQMFBwkLDQ8AAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAA+EoA4RhDj7FcYF AAHgEAZehKAOYIQ4+xAAAAAuAAEALgACAC4AAwAuAAQALgAFAC4ABgAuAAcALgABAAAAAAABAwUH CQsNDxEAAAAAAAAAAAAAGAAAD4TgEBGEYPoVxgUAAUgSBl6E4BBghGD6EgAAAC4AAQAuAAIALgAD AC4ABAAuAAUALgAGAC4ABwAuAAgALgABAAAAAAABAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGAAAD4RoARGE mP4VxgUAAWgBBl6EaAFghJj+AgAAAC4AAQAAAAAAAQMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAA+EGAMR hFD+FcYFAAEYAwZehBgDYIRQ/gQAAAAuAAEALgABAAAAAAABAwUAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGAAA D4TIBBGECP4VxgUAAaAFBl6EyARghAj+BgAAAC4AAQAuAAIALgABAAAAAAABAwUHAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAGAAAD4TABhGEeP0VxgUAAXAIBl6EwAZghHj9CAAAAC4AAQAuAAIALgADAC4AAQAAAAAA AQMFBwkAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAA+EuAgRhOj8FcYFAAHYCQZehLgIYITo/AoAAAAuAAEALgAC AC4AAwAuAAQALgABAAAAAAABAwUHCQsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGAAAD4SwChGEWPwVxgUAAagMBl6E sApghFj8DAAAAC4AAQAuAAIALgADAC4ABAAuAAUALgABAAAAAAABAwUHCQsNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA GAAAD4SoDBGEyPsVxgUAARAOBl6EqAxghMj7DgAAAC4AAQAuAAIALgADAC4ABAAuAAUALgAGAC4A AQAAAAAAAQMFBwkLDQ8AAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAA+EoA4RhDj7FcYFAAHgEAZehKAOYIQ4+xAAAAAu AAEALgACAC4AAwAuAAQALgAFAC4ABgAuAAcALgABAAAAAAABAwUHCQsNDxEAAAAAAAAAAAAAGAAA D4TgEBGEYPoVxgUAAUgSBl6E4BBghGD6EgAAAC4AAQAuAAIALgADAC4ABAAuAAUALgAGAC4ABwAu AAgALgAXAAAAFxAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPAAAAAAAAAATGAAAD4T9AhGEe/0VxgUAAf0CBl6E/QJghHv9 T0oCAFBKAwBRSgIAXkoCAG8oAAEALQABAAAAFxAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPAAAAAAAAAAZGAAAD4TcBRGE mP4VxgUAAdwFBl6E3AVghJj+T0oGAFFKBgBeSgYAbygAh2gAAAAAiEgAAAEAbwABAAAAFxAAAAAA AAAAAAAAPAAAAAAAAAAVGAAAD4SsCBGEmP4VxgUAAawIBl6ErAhghJj+T0oHAFFKBwBvKACHaAAA AACISAAAAQCn8AEAAAAXEAAAAAAAAAAAAAA8AAAAAAAAABUYAAAPhHwLEYSY/hXGBQABfAsGXoR8 C2CEmP5PSgEAUUoBAG8oAIdoAAAAAIhIAAABALfwAQAAABcQAAAAAAAAAAAAADwAAAAAAAAAGRgA AA+ETA4RhJj+FcYFAAFMDgZehEwOYISY/k9KBgBRSgYAXkoGAG8oAIdoAAAAAIhIAAABAG8AAQAA ABcQAAAAAAAAAAAAADwAAAAAAAAAFRgAAA+EHBERhJj+FcYFAAEcEQZehBwRYISY/k9KBwBRSgcA bygAh2gAAAAAiEgAAAEAp/ABAAAAFxAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPAAAAAAAAAAVGAAAD4TsExGEmP4VxgUA AewTBl6E7BNghJj+T0oBAFFKAQBvKACHaAAAAACISAAAAQC38AEAAAAXEAAAAAAAAAAAAAA8AAAA AAAAABkYAAAPhLwWEYSY/hXGBQABvBYGXoS8FmCEmP5PSgYAUUoGAF5KBgBvKACHaAAAAACISAAA AQBvAAEAAAAXEAAAAAAAAAAAAAA8AAAAAAAAABUYAAAPhIwZEYSY/hXGBQABjBkGXoSMGWCEmP5P SgcAUUoHAG8oAIdoAAAAAIhIAAABAKfwCAAAABcAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACxgAAA+EOgIR hMb9FcYFAAE6AgZehDoCYITG/U9KAABRSgAAbygAAQAtAAAAAAAXAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAsYAAAPhGgBEYSY/hXGBQABaAEGXoRoAWCEmP5PSgAAUUoAAG8oAAEALQAEAAAAAAABAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAADGAAAD4RoARGEmP4VxgUAAWgBBl6EaAFghJj+bygAAQAAAAUAAAAAAAEDAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMYAAAPhGgBEYSY/hXGBQABaAEGXoRoAWCEmP5vKAADAAAALgABAAEAAAAA AAEDBQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMYAAAPhNACEYQw/RXGBQAB0AIGXoTQAmCEMP1vKAAFAAAALgAB AC4AAgABAAAAAAABAwUHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADGAAAD4TQAhGEMP0VxgUAAdACBl6E0AJghDD9 bygABwAAAC4AAQAuAAIALgADAAEAAAAAAAEDBQcJAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMYAAAPhDgEEYTI+xXG BQABOAQGXoQ4BGCEyPtvKAAJAAAALgABAC4AAgAuAAMALgAEAAEAAAAAAAEDBQcJCwAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAMYAAAPhDgEEYTI+xXGBQABOAQGXoQ4BGCEyPtvKAALAAAALgABAC4AAgAuAAMALgAEAC4A BQABAAAAAAABAwUHCQsNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADGAAAD4SgBRGEYPoVxgUAAaAFBl6EoAVghGD6bygA DQAAAC4AAQAuAAIALgADAC4ABAAuAAUALgAGAAEAAAAAAAEDBQcJCw0PAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMYAAAP hKAFEYRg+hXGBQABoAUGXoSgBWCEYPpvKAAPAAAALgABAC4AAgAuAAMALgAEAC4ABQAuAAYALgAH AAEAAAAAAAEDBQcJCw0PEQAAAAAAAAAAAAMYAAAPhKAFEYRg+hXGBQABoAUGXoSgBWCEYPpvKAAR AAAALgABAC4AAgAuAAMALgAEAC4ABQAuAAYALgAHAC4ACAAXAAAAFwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAATGAAAD4TBAhGEe/0VxgUAAcECBl6EwQJghHv9T0oCAFBKAwBRSgIAXkoCAG8oAAEALQABAAAA F4AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZGAAAD4R0BBGEmP4VxgUAAXQEBl6EdARghJj+T0oGAFFKBgBe SgYAbygAh2gAAAAAiEgAAAEAbwABAAAAF4AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAVGAAAD4REBxGEmP4V xgUAAUQHBl6ERAdghJj+T0oHAFFKBwBvKACHaAAAAACISAAAAQCn8AEAAAAXgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAABUYAAAPhBQKEYSY/hXGBQABFAoGXoQUCmCEmP5PSgEAUUoBAG8oAIdoAAAAAIhIAAAB ALfwAQAAABeAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGRgAAA+E5AwRhJj+FcYFAAHkDAZehOQMYISY/k9K BgBRSgYAXkoGAG8oAIdoAAAAAIhIAAABAG8AAQAAABeAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAFRgAAA+E tA8RhJj+FcYFAAG0DwZehLQPYISY/k9KBwBRSgcAbygAh2gAAAAAiEgAAAEAp/ABAAAAF4AAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAVGAAAD4SEEhGEmP4VxgUAAYQSBl6EhBJghJj+T0oBAFFKAQBvKACHaAAA AACISAAAAQC38AEAAAAXgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABkYAAAPhFQVEYSY/hXGBQABVBUGXoRU FWCEmP5PSgYAUUoGAF5KBgBvKACHaAAAAACISAAAAQBvAAEAAAAXgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA ABUYAAAPhCQYEYSY/hXGBQABJBgGXoQkGGCEmP5PSgcAUUoHAG8oAIdoAAAAAIhIAAABAKfwAQAA AAAAAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAA+EaAERhJj+FcYFAAFoAQZehGgBYISY/gIAAAAuAAEA AAAAAAEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMYAAAPhMECEYQ//RXGBQABwQIGXoTBAmCEP/1vKAABAAAA AQAAAAAEAQMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAxgAAA+EVwMRhKn8FcYFAAFXAwZehFcDYISp/G8oAAMA AAAuAAEAAQAAAAAEAQMFAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAxgAAA+EVwMRhKn8FcYFAAFXAwZehFcDYISp /G8oAAUAAAAuAAEALgACAAEAAAAABAEDBQcAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMYAAAPhDgEEYTI+xXGBQAB OAQGXoQ4BGCEyPtvKAAHAAAALgABAC4AAgAuAAMAAQAAAAAEAQMFBwkAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAxgA AA+EOAQRhMj7FcYFAAE4BAZehDgEYITI+28oAAkAAAAuAAEALgACAC4AAwAuAAQAAQAAAAAEAQMF BwkLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAxgAAA+EoAURhGD6FcYFAAGgBQZehKAFYIRg+m8oAAsAAAAuAAEALgAC AC4AAwAuAAQALgAFAAEAAAAABAEDBQcJCw0AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMYAAAPhKAFEYRg+hXGBQABoAUG XoSgBWCEYPpvKAANAAAALgABAC4AAgAuAAMALgAEAC4ABQAuAAYAAQAAAAAEAQMFBwkLDQ8AAAAA AAAAAAAAAxgAAA+ECAcRhPj4FcYFAAEIBwZehAgHYIT4+G8oAA8AAAAuAAEALgACAC4AAwAuAAQA LgAFAC4ABgAuAAcAAQAAAAAEAQMFBwkLDQ8RAAAAAAAAAAAAAxgAAA+ECAcRhPj4FcYFAAEIBwZe hAgHYIT4+G8oABEAAAAuAAEALgACAC4AAwAuAAQALgAFAC4ABgAuAAcALgAIAAQAAAAAAAEAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMYAAAPhFcDEYSp/BXGBQABVwMGXoRXA2CEqfxvKAABAAAABAAAAAAAAQMA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAxgAAA+EVwMRhKn8FcYFAAFXAwZehFcDYISp/G8oAAMAAAAuAAEAAQAA AAAAAQMFAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAxgAAA+EVwMRhKn8FcYFAAFXAwZehFcDYISp/G8oAAUAAAAu AAEALgACAAEAAAAAAAEDBQcAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMYAAAPhFcDEYSp/BXGBQABVwMGXoRXA2CE qfxvKAAHAAAALgABAC4AAgAuAAMAAQAAAAAAAQMFBwkAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAxgAAA+EOAQRhMj7 FcYFAAE4BAZehDgEYITI+28oAAkAAAAuAAEALgACAC4AAwAuAAQAAQAAAAAAAQMFBwkLAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAxgAAA+EOAQRhMj7FcYFAAE4BAZehDgEYITI+28oAAsAAAAuAAEALgACAC4AAwAuAAQA LgAFAAEAAAAAAAEDBQcJCw0AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMYAAAPhKAFEYRg+hXGBQABoAUGXoSgBWCEYPpv KAANAAAALgABAC4AAgAuAAMALgAEAC4ABQAuAAYAAQAAAAAAAQMFBwkLDQ8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAxgA AA+EoAURhGD6FcYFAAGgBQZehKAFYIRg+m8oAA8AAAAuAAEALgACAC4AAwAuAAQALgAFAC4ABgAu AAcAAQAAAAAAAQMFBwkLDQ8RAAAAAAAAAAAAAxgAAA+EoAURhGD6FcYFAAGgBQZehKAFYIRg+m8o ABEAAAAuAAEALgACAC4AAwAuAAQALgAFAC4ABgAuAAcALgAIAAQAAAAXAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAMYAAAPhDgEEYSY/hXGBQABOAQGXoQ4BGCEmP5vKAABAC0ACAAAAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAxgAAA+EwQIRhD/9FcYFAAHBAgZehMECYIQ//W8oAAEAAAABAAAAAAQBAwAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAADGAAAD4RXAxGEqfwVxgUAAVcDBl6EVwNghKn8bygAAwAAAC4AAQABAAAAAAQBAwUA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADGAAAD4RXAxGEqfwVxgUAAVcDBl6EVwNghKn8bygABQAAAC4AAQAuAAIA AQAAAAAEAQMFBwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAxgAAA+EOAQRhMj7FcYFAAE4BAZehDgEYITI+28oAAcA AAAuAAEALgACAC4AAwABAAAAAAQBAwUHCQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADGAAAD4Q4BBGEyPsVxgUAATgE Bl6EOARghMj7bygACQAAAC4AAQAuAAIALgADAC4ABAABAAAAAAQBAwUHCQsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD GAAAD4SgBRGEYPoVxgUAAaAFBl6EoAVghGD6bygACwAAAC4AAQAuAAIALgADAC4ABAAuAAUAAQAA AAAEAQMFBwkLDQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAxgAAA+EoAURhGD6FcYFAAGgBQZehKAFYIRg+m8oAA0AAAAu AAEALgACAC4AAwAuAAQALgAFAC4ABgABAAAAAAQBAwUHCQsNDwAAAAAAAAAAAAADGAAAD4QIBxGE +PgVxgUAAQgHBl6ECAdghPj4bygADwAAAC4AAQAuAAIALgADAC4ABAAuAAUALgAGAC4ABwABAAAA AAQBAwUHCQsNDxEAAAAAAAAAAAADGAAAD4QIBxGE+PgVxgUAAQgHBl6ECAdghPj4bygAEQAAAC4A AQAuAAIALgADAC4ABAAuAAUALgAGAC4ABwAuAAgABQAAAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAxgA AA+EVwMRhKn8FcYFAAFXAwZehFcDYISp/G8oAAEAAAABAAAAAAABAwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD GAAAD4RXAxGEqfwVxgUAAVcDBl6EVwNghKn8bygAAwAAAC4AAQABAAAAAAABAwUAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAADGAAAD4RXAxGEqfwVxgUAAVcDBl6EVwNghKn8bygABQAAAC4AAQAuAAIAAQAAAAAAAQMF BwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAxgAAA+EVwMRhKn8FcYFAAFXAwZehFcDYISp/G8oAAcAAAAuAAEALgAC AC4AAwABAAAAAAABAwUHCQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADGAAAD4Q4BBGEyPsVxgUAATgEBl6EOARghMj7 bygACQAAAC4AAQAuAAIALgADAC4ABAABAAAAAAABAwUHCQsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADGAAAD4Q4BBGE yPsVxgUAATgEBl6EOARghMj7bygACwAAAC4AAQAuAAIALgADAC4ABAAuAAUAAQAAAAAAAQMFBwkL DQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAxgAAA+EoAURhGD6FcYFAAGgBQZehKAFYIRg+m8oAA0AAAAuAAEALgACAC4A AwAuAAQALgAFAC4ABgABAAAAAAABAwUHCQsNDwAAAAAAAAAAAAADGAAAD4SgBRGEYPoVxgUAAaAF Bl6EoAVghGD6bygADwAAAC4AAQAuAAIALgADAC4ABAAuAAUALgAGAC4ABwABAAAAAAABAwUHCQsN DxEAAAAAAAAAAAADGAAAD4SgBRGEYPoVxgUAAaAFBl6EoAVghGD6bygAEQAAAC4AAQAuAAIALgAD AC4ABAAuAAUALgAGAC4ABwAuAAgAFwAAABcQAAAAAAAAAAAAADwAAAAAAAAAExgAAA+E/QIRhHv9 FcYFAAH9AgZehP0CYIR7/U9KAgBQSgMAUUoCAF5KAgBvKAABAC0AAQAAABeQAAAAAAAAAAAAADwA AAAAAAAAGRgAAA+E3AURhJj+FcYFAAHcBQZehNwFYISY/k9KBgBRSgYAXkoGAG8oAIdoAAAAAIhI AAABAG8AAQAAABeQAAAAAAAAAAAAADwAAAAAAAAAFRgAAA+ErAgRhJj+FcYFAAGsCAZehKwIYISY /k9KBwBRSgcAbygAh2gAAAAAiEgAAAEAp/ABAAAAF5AAAAAAAAAAAAAAPAAAAAAAAAAVGAAAD4R8 CxGEmP4VxgUAAXwLBl6EfAtghJj+T0oBAFFKAQBvKACHaAAAAACISAAAAQC38AEAAAAXkAAAAAAA AAAAAAA8AAAAAAAAABkYAAAPhEwOEYSY/hXGBQABTA4GXoRMDmCEmP5PSgYAUUoGAF5KBgBvKACH aAAAAACISAAAAQBvAAEAAAAXkAAAAAAAAAAAAAA8AAAAAAAAABUYAAAPhBwREYSY/hXGBQABHBEG XoQcEWCEmP5PSgcAUUoHAG8oAIdoAAAAAIhIAAABAKfwAQAAABeQAAAAAAAAAAAAADwAAAAAAAAA FRgAAA+E7BMRhJj+FcYFAAHsEwZehOwTYISY/k9KAQBRSgEAbygAh2gAAAAAiEgAAAEAt/ABAAAA F5AAAAAAAAAAAAAAPAAAAAAAAAAZGAAAD4S8FhGEmP4VxgUAAbwWBl6EvBZghJj+T0oGAFFKBgBe SgYAbygAh2gAAAAAiEgAAAEAbwABAAAAF5AAAAAAAAAAAAAAPAAAAAAAAAAVGAAAD4SMGRGEmP4V xgUAAYwZBl6EjBlghJj+T0oHAFFKBwBvKACHaAAAAACISAAAAQCn8AEAAAAAAAEAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAPhLABEYRQ/hXGBQABsAEGXoSwAWCEUP4BAAAAAQAAAAAAAQMAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAABgAAA+EQAIRhMD9FcYFAAFAAgZehEACYITA/QMAAAAuAAEAAQAAAAAAAQMFAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAA+E0AIRhDD9FcYFAAHQAgZehNACYIQw/QUAAAAuAAEALgACAAEAAAAAAAED BQcAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYAAAPhGADEYSg/BXGBQABYAMGXoRgA2CEoPwHAAAALgABAC4AAgAu AAMAAQAAAAAAAQMFBwkAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAA+E8AMRhBD8FcYFAAHwAwZehPADYIQQ/AkA AAAuAAEALgACAC4AAwAuAAQAAQAAAAAAAQMFBwkLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAA+EgAQRhID7FcYF AAGABAZehIAEYISA+wsAAAAuAAEALgACAC4AAwAuAAQALgAFAAEAAAAAAAEDBQcJCw0AAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAYAAAPhBAFEYTw+hXGBQABEAUGXoQQBWCE8PoNAAAALgABAC4AAgAuAAMALgAEAC4ABQAu AAYAAQAAAAAAAQMFBwkLDQ8AAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAA+EoAURhGD6FcYFAAGgBQZehKAFYIRg+g8A AAAuAAEALgACAC4AAwAuAAQALgAFAC4ABgAuAAcAAQAAAAAAAQMFBwkLDQ8RAAAAAAAAAAAAABgA AA+EMAYRhND5FcYFAAEwBgZehDAGYITQ+REAAAAuAAEALgACAC4AAwAuAAQALgAFAC4ABgAuAAcA LgAIAAQAAAAAAAEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMYAAAPhHQEEYSM+xXGBQABdAQGXoR0BGCEjPtv KAABAAAAAQAAAAAAAQMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAxgAAA+EdAQRhIz7FcYFAAF0BAZehHQEYISM +28oAAMAAAAuAAEAAgAAAAAAAQMFAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAxgAAA+EdAQRhIz7FcYFAAF0BAZe hHQEYISM+28oAAUAAAAuAAEALgACAAEAAAAAAAEDBQcAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMYAAAPhHQEEYSM +xXGBQABdAQGXoR0BGCEjPtvKAAHAAAALgABAC4AAgAuAAMAAQAAAAAAAQMFBwkAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAxgAAA+EdAQRhIz7FcYFAAF0BAZehHQEYISM+28oAAkAAAAuAAEALgACAC4AAwAuAAQAAQAA AAAAAQMFBwkLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAxgAAA+EdAQRhIz7FcYFAAF0BAZehHQEYISM+28oAAsAAAAu AAEALgACAC4AAwAuAAQALgAFAAEAAAAAAAEDBQcJCw0AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMYAAAPhKAFEYRg+hXG BQABoAUGXoSgBWCEYPpvKAANAAAALgABAC4AAgAuAAMALgAEAC4ABQAuAAYAAQAAAAAAAQMFBwkL DQ8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAxgAAA+EoAURhGD6FcYFAAGgBQZehKAFYIRg+m8oAA8AAAAuAAEALgACAC4A AwAuAAQALgAFAC4ABgAuAAcAAQAAAAAAAQMFBwkLDQ8RAAAAAAAAAAAAAxgAAA+EoAURhGD6FcYF AAGgBQZehKAFYIRg+m8oABEAAAAuAAEALgACAC4AAwAuAAQALgAFAC4ABgAuAAcALgAIAAEAAAAX EAAAAAAAAAAAAABoAQAAAAAAABUYAAAPhNACEYSY/hXGBQAB0AIGXoTQAmCEmP5PSgEAUUoBAG8o AIdoAAAAAIhIAAABALfwAQAAABeQAAAAAAAAAAAAAGgBAAAAAAAAGRgAAA+EoAURhJj+FcYFAAGg BQZehKAFYISY/k9KBgBRSgYAXkoGAG8oAIdoAAAAAIhIAAABAG8AAQAAABeQAAAAAAAAAAAAAGgB AAAAAAAAFRgAAA+EcAgRhJj+FcYFAAFwCAZehHAIYISY/k9KBwBRSgcAbygAh2gAAAAAiEgAAAEA p/ABAAAAF5AAAAAAAAAAAAAAaAEAAAAAAAAVGAAAD4RACxGEmP4VxgUAAUALBl6EQAtghJj+T0oB AFFKAQBvKACHaAAAAACISAAAAQC38AEAAAAXkAAAAAAAAAAAAABoAQAAAAAAABkYAAAPhBAOEYSY /hXGBQABEA4GXoQQDmCEmP5PSgYAUUoGAF5KBgBvKACHaAAAAACISAAAAQBvAAEAAAAXkAAAAAAA AAAAAABoAQAAAAAAABUYAAAPhOAQEYSY/hXGBQAB4BAGXoTgEGCEmP5PSgcAUUoHAG8oAIdoAAAA AIhIAAABAKfwAQAAABeQAAAAAAAAAAAAAGgBAAAAAAAAFRgAAA+EsBMRhJj+FcYFAAGwEwZehLAT YISY/k9KAQBRSgEAbygAh2gAAAAAiEgAAAEAt/ABAAAAF5AAAAAAAAAAAAAAaAEAAAAAAAAZGAAA D4SAFhGEmP4VxgUAAYAWBl6EgBZghJj+T0oGAFFKBgBeSgYAbygAh2gAAAAAiEgAAAEAbwABAAAA F5AAAAAAAAAAAAAAaAEAAAAAAAAVGAAAD4RQGRGEmP4VxgUAAVAZBl6EUBlghJj+T0oHAFFKBwBv KACHaAAAAACISAAAAQCn8AIAAAAAAAEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMYAAAPhNACEYQw/RXGBQAB 0AIGXoTQAmCEMP1vKAABAAAACgAAAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAxgAAA+EVwMRhKn8FcYF AAFXAwZehFcDYISp/G8oAAEAAAABAAAAAAABAwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADGAAAD4RXAxGEqfwV xgUAAVcDBl6EVwNghKn8bygAAwAAAC4AAQABAAAAAAABAwUAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADGAAAD4RX AxGEqfwVxgUAAVcDBl6EVwNghKn8bygABQAAAC4AAQAuAAIAAQAAAAAAAQMFBwAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAxgAAA+EOAQRhMj7FcYFAAE4BAZehDgEYITI+28oAAcAAAAuAAEALgACAC4AAwABAAAAAAAB AwUHCQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADGAAAD4Q4BBGEyPsVxgUAATgEBl6EOARghMj7bygACQAAAC4AAQAu AAIALgADAC4ABAABAAAAAAABAwUHCQsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADGAAAD4SgBRGEYPoVxgUAAaAFBl6E oAVghGD6bygACwAAAC4AAQAuAAIALgADAC4ABAAuAAUAAQAAAAAAAQMFBwkLDQAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AxgAAA+EoAURhGD6FcYFAAGgBQZehKAFYIRg+m8oAA0AAAAuAAEALgACAC4AAwAuAAQALgAFAC4A BgABAAAAAAABAwUHCQsNDwAAAAAAAAAAAAADGAAAD4QIBxGE+PgVxgUAAQgHBl6ECAdghPj4bygA DwAAAC4AAQAuAAIALgADAC4ABAAuAAUALgAGAC4ABwABAAAAAAABAwUHCQsNDxEAAAAAAAAAAAAD GAAAD4QIBxGE+PgVxgUAAQgHBl6ECAdghPj4bygAEQAAAC4AAQAuAAIALgADAC4ABAAuAAUALgAG AC4ABwAuAAgAAQAAABcQAAAAAAAAAAAAAGgBAAAAAAAAFRgAAA+E0AIRhJj+FcYFAAHQAgZehNAC YISY/k9KAQBRSgEAbygAh2gAAAAAiEgAAAEAt/ABAAAAF5AAAAAAAAAAAAAAaAEAAAAAAAAZGAAA D4SgBRGEmP4VxgUAAaAFBl6EoAVghJj+T0oGAFFKBgBeSgYAbygAh2gAAAAAiEgAAAEAbwABAAAA F5AAAAAAAAAAAAAAaAEAAAAAAAAVGAAAD4RwCBGEmP4VxgUAAXAIBl6EcAhghJj+T0oHAFFKBwBv KACHaAAAAACISAAAAQCn8AEAAAAXkAAAAAAAAAAAAABoAQAAAAAAABUYAAAPhEALEYSY/hXGBQAB QAsGXoRAC2CEmP5PSgEAUUoBAG8oAIdoAAAAAIhIAAABALfwAQAAABeQAAAAAAAAAAAAAGgBAAAA AAAAGRgAAA+EEA4RhJj+FcYFAAEQDgZehBAOYISY/k9KBgBRSgYAXkoGAG8oAIdoAAAAAIhIAAAB AG8AAQAAABeQAAAAAAAAAAAAAGgBAAAAAAAAFRgAAA+E4BARhJj+FcYFAAHgEAZehOAQYISY/k9K BwBRSgcAbygAh2gAAAAAiEgAAAEAp/ABAAAAF5AAAAAAAAAAAAAAaAEAAAAAAAAVGAAAD4SwExGE mP4VxgUAAbATBl6EsBNghJj+T0oBAFFKAQBvKACHaAAAAACISAAAAQC38AEAAAAXkAAAAAAAAAAA AABoAQAAAAAAABkYAAAPhIAWEYSY/hXGBQABgBYGXoSAFmCEmP5PSgYAUUoGAF5KBgBvKACHaAAA AACISAAAAQBvAAEAAAAXkAAAAAAAAAAAAABoAQAAAAAAABUYAAAPhFAZEYSY/hXGBQABUBkGXoRQ GWCEmP5PSgcAUUoHAG8oAIdoAAAAAIhIAAABAKfwFQAAAAlY1nIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA7DRlFAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAACko7BQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAt0PzkAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAxMxkuAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA hj+1YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHkLRhsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABQE79EAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAApRe4TwAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAK0yW3sAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADOJT9CAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA0xLaNgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMK znIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADxO4dLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAkDWJegAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD0zsggAAAAAAAAA AAAAAABgNNB3AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAwUgyfQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAL8u/DkAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABpTJ9t AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA2hBKHwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// FQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP//FQAAAAAAEgAB AAcE//////////////////////////////////////////8AAAAAAAAAAAAAEgDA0lYEAwAJBAUA CQQBAAkEAwAJBAUACQQBAAkEAwAJBAUACQQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASAMDSVgQDAAkEBQAJBAEACQQD AAkEBQAJBAEACQQDAAkEBQAJBAAAAAASAAEACQQDAAkEBQAJBAEACQQDAAkEBQAJBAEACQQDAAkE BQAJBAAAAAASAAEACQQDAAkEBQAJBAEACQQDAAkEBQAJBAEACQQDAAkEBQAJBAUArkrLCgAAAAAA AAAAAAECAAIAthBcFasfkCIAAAAAHQEWAEsAAABkAAAAZAAAAAAA/wAMAQQAAQCrH5AiAAAAAAAA AAAAAQIAAgAjKZIoAAAAAAAAAAAAAQIAAgCYUjZCIymSKAAAAAAAAFgAAAAEAAAACAAAAOUAAAAA AAAAVwAAAKRNBABmKwYA72AJADIDCgBCTgwAg0AOABJzEADkVhYA2zUaAAdaGgCmWxwADXIeAIdf JgBtPCgAyVguAKdhMQC1dDMAu1BFAAMHRgDiSkkAnldNADVlTQCJHE8ANjRQAGE2UACoKFEAtyZf AGFGYgAWJ2gAMFNtADJ9bQDebG8ApSdyALVOdwAfWXgAMjp5ALYkfQA6DYIA4VSCALBahwD7bosA 6jOPAKBajwAWDpAAamORAAcKlAASTpYA8S+ZALVGmgChX58Al3ufAOcWoACbVaAAaGykAEt+pQD6 FaYARD6oAC8kqgC7TaoA2AiwAOw9sQC0EbIA5me0ACpRtgBRObcAnD67AKNfvwCHT8EAYmXCALwK xQBLPMYAGznIADMhygAMA9YA9wzWABxg1wBtCtkAI0TkAJwX5QDKbugAcwnpAN5E7ABXZuwA00n0 ADoQ9wBUJfcAZHX3AAEY/wAAAAAA/QYAAP8GAABsBwAAbQcAAG8HAAChBwAAogcAAKQHAAABCAAA AggAAAQIAAAJCQAACgkAAAwJAADrCQAA7AkAAO4JAAAjCgAAJAoAACYKAACfCwAAoAsAABQMAAAA AAAACAAAAAIBAAACAQAAngEAAAIBAAACAQAAngEAAAIBAAACAQAAngEAAAIBAAACAQAAngEAAAIB AAACAQAAngEAAAIBAAACAQAAngEAAAIBAAACAQAAlgEAAP9AA4ABAAAAAAAAAAAAQMi6DQEAAQAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAhAAAAAAAAAAEwwAAIABABAAQAAA//8BAAAABwBVAG4AawBuAG8AdwBu AP//AQAIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD//wEAAAAAAP//AAACAP//AAAAAP//AAACAP//AAAAAAgAAABHFpAB AAACAgYDBQQFAgMEh3oAIAAAAIAIAAAAAAAAAP8BAAAAAAAAVABpAG0AZQBzACAATgBlAHcAIABS AG8AbQBhAG4AAAA1FpABAgAFBQECAQcGAgUHAAAAAAAAABAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIAAAAAAUwB5AG0A YgBvAGwAAAAzJpABAAACCwYEAgICAgIEh3oAIAAAAIAIAAAAAAAAAP8BAAAAAAAAQQByAGkAYQBs AAAAVwGQAYEHAgMGAAABAQEBAQEAAAAAAAYJEAAAAAAAAAAAAAgAAAAAAEIAYQB0AGEAbgBnAAAA QQByAGkAYQBsACAAVQBuAGkAYwBvAGQAZQAgAE0AUwAAADUmAAAAAAILBgQDBQQEAgSHegBhAAAA gAgAAAAAAAAA/wEBAAAAAABUAGEAaABvAG0AYQAAAFcCkAGGBwIBBgADAQEBAQEBAAAAAAAOCBAA AAAAAAAAAAAEAAAAAABTAGkAbQBTAHUAbgAAAEEAcgBpAGEAbAAgAFUAbgBpAGMAbwBkAGUAIABN AFMAAAA/NZABAAACBwMJAgIFAgQEh3oAIAAAAIAIAAAAAAAAAP8BAAAAAAAAQwBvAHUAcgBpAGUA cgAgAE4AZQB3AAAAOwaQAQIABQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAACAAAAAAFcAaQBu AGcAZABpAG4AZwBzAAAAIgAEAAEIiBgA8BIFAABoAQAAAABhQ+GmYUPhplpzrIYCAAAAAAC8AQAA 5QkAAAEABQAAAAQAgxAVAAAAvAEAAOUJAAABAAUAAAAVAAAAAAAAACEDAPAQBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKUGwAe0ALQAgAASNAAAEAAZAGQAAAAZAAAAnAsAAJwLAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACAAAA AAAAAAAADDKDcQDwEATf3//9AQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABIUAAAAAAI8P8PAQAB PwAA5AQAAP///3////9/////f////3////9/////f////38vJKoAAAQAADIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AQAAAP//EgAAAAAALQBDADoAXABVAHMAZQByAHMAXABVAHMAZQByAGkAbgBmAFwATQBTAE8AZgBm AGkAYwBlAFwAVABlAG0AcABsAGEAdABlAFwAbgBiAGwAYQBuAGsALgBkAG8AdAAeADMARwBQAFAA IABUAFMARwAtAFMAQQAgAFcARwAyACAAbQBlAGUAdABpAG4AZwAgAGEAZwBlAG4AZABhAAAAAAAA AAYAQgBhAGwAYQB6AHMACQBOAG8AawBpAGEAXwBCAEIAZQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGAA AAAGAAAAFQAAAAAADAABAAwAAgAMAAMADAAEAAwABQAMAAYADAAHAAwACAAMAAkADAAKAAwACwAM AAwADAANAAwADgAMAA8ADAAQAAwAEQAMABIADAATAAwAFAAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD+/wAABQECAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAB AAAA4IWf8vlPaBCrkQgAKyez2TAAAACMAQAAEQAAAAEAAACQAAAAAgAAAJgAAAADAAAAwAAAAAQA AADMAAAABQAAANwAAAAHAAAA6AAAAAgAAAD8AAAACQAAABABAAASAAAAHAEAAAoAAAA8AQAACwAA AEgBAAAMAAAAVAEAAA0AAABgAQAADgAAAGwBAAAPAAAAdAEAABAAAAB8AQAAEwAAAIQBAAACAAAA 5AQAAB4AAAAgAAAAM0dQUCBUU0ctU0EgV0cyIG1lZXRpbmcgYWdlbmRhAAAeAAAABAAAAAAAAAAe AAAACAAAAEJhbGF6cwAAHgAAAAQAAAAAAAAAHgAAAAwAAABuYmxhbmsuZG90AAAeAAAADAAAAE5v a2lhX0JCZQAAAB4AAAAEAAAAMgAAAB4AAAAYAAAATWljcm9zb2Z0IE9mZmljZSBXb3JkAAAAQAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAQAAAAAB8SgN7H8cBQAAAAAAms7ZekMoBQAAAAAAms7ZekMoBAwAAAAEAAAADAAAA vAEAAAMAAADlCQAAAwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA/v8AAAUBAgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAgAAAALVzdWc LhsQk5cIACss+a5EAAAABdXN1ZwuGxCTlwgAKyz5rkwBAAAIAQAADAAAAAEAAABoAAAADwAAAHAA AAAFAAAAfAAAAAYAAACEAAAAEQAAAIwAAAAXAAAAlAAAAAsAAACcAAAAEAAAAKQAAAATAAAArAAA ABYAAAC0AAAADQAAALwAAAAMAAAA5wAAAAIAAADkBAAAHgAAAAQAAABOU04AAwAAABUAAAADAAAA BQAAAAMAAACcCwAAAwAAAA8nCwALAAAAAAAAAAsAAAAAAAAACwAAAAAAAAALAAAAAAAAAB4QAAAB AAAAHwAAADNHUFAgVFNHLVNBIFdHMiBtZWV0aW5nIGFnZW5kYQAMEAAAAgAAAB4AAAAGAAAAVGl0 bGUAAwAAAAEAAAAAAADEAwAABAAAAAAAAAAoAAAAAQAAAFgAAAACAAAAYAAAAAMAAAC4AwAAAgAA AAIAAAAMAAAAX1BJRF9ITElOS1MAAwAAABAAAABfTmV3UmV2aWV3Q3ljbGUAAgAAAOQEAABBAAAA UAMAAB4AAAADAAAAZwAoAAMAAAAMAAAAAwAAAAAAAAADAAAABQAAAB8AAABKAAAAaAB0AHQAcAA6 AC8ALwB3AHcAdwAuADMAZwBwAHAALgBvAHIAZwAvAGYAdABwAC8AdwBvAHIAawBzAGgAbwBwAC8A MgAwADEAMAAtADAAMwAtADAAMQBfAEkAUAB2ADQALQB0AG8ALQBJAFAAdgA2AF8AdwBpAHQAaAAt AEkARQBUAEYALwBSAGUAcABvAHIAdAAAAB8AAAABAAAAAACPEQMAAAACAF8AAwAAAAkAAAADAAAA AAAAAAMAAAAFAAAAHwAAAEgAAABoAHQAdABwADoALwAvAHcAdwB3AC4AMwBnAHAAcAAuAG8AcgBn AC8AZgB0AHAALwB3AG8AcgBrAHMAaABvAHAALwAyADAAMQAwAC0AMAAzAC0AMAAxAF8ASQBQAHYA NAAtAHQAbwAtAEkAUAB2ADYAXwB3AGkAdABoAC0ASQBFAFQARgAvAEQAbwBjAHMAAAAfAAAAAQAA AAAAjxEDAAAANAAqAAMAAAAGAAAAAwAAAAAAAAADAAAABQAAAB8AAAArAAAAaAB0AHQAcABzADoA LwAvAHcAdwB3AC4AaQBlAHQAZgAuAG8AcgBnAC8AbQBhAGkAbABtAGEAbgAvAGwAaQBzAHQAaQBu AGYAbwAvADMAZwB2ADYAAAAAAB8AAAABAAAAAACPEQMAAAACAF8AAwAAAAMAAAADAAAAAAAAAAMA AAAFAAAAHwAAAEgAAABoAHQAdABwADoALwAvAHcAdwB3AC4AMwBnAHAAcAAuAG8AcgBnAC8AZgB0 AHAALwB3AG8AcgBrAHMAaABvAHAALwAyADAAMQAwAC0AMAAzAC0AMAAxAF8ASQBQAHYANAAtAHQA bwAtAEkAUAB2ADYAXwB3AGkAdABoAC0ASQBFAFQARgAvAEQAbwBjAHMAAAAfAAAAAQAAAAAAjxED AAAAVAAjAAMAAAAAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAADAAAABQAAAB8AAAAdAAAAbQBhAGkAbAB0AG8AOgBNAGEA dQByAGkAYwBlAC4AUABvAHAAZQBAAGUAdABzAGkALgBvAHIAZwAAAAAAHwAAAAEAAAAAAI8RHgAA AAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEAAAACAAAAAwAAAAQAAAAFAAAABgAAAAcAAAAIAAAACQAAAAoAAAAL AAAADAAAAA0AAAAOAAAADwAAABAAAAARAAAAEgAAABMAAAAUAAAAFQAAABYAAAAXAAAAGAAAABkA AAAaAAAA/v///xwAAAAdAAAAHgAAAB8AAAAgAAAAIQAAACIAAAD+////JAAAACUAAAAmAAAAJwAA ACgAAAApAAAAKgAAACsAAAAsAAAALQAAAC4AAAAvAAAAMAAAADEAAAAyAAAAMwAAADQAAAA1AAAA NgAAADcAAAA4AAAAOQAAADoAAAA7AAAAPAAAAD0AAAA+AAAAPwAAAEAAAABBAAAAQgAAAEMAAABE AAAARQAAAEYAAABHAAAASAAAAEkAAABKAAAASwAAAEwAAABNAAAATgAAAE8AAABQAAAA/v///1IA AABTAAAAVAAAAFUAAABWAAAAVwAAAFgAAAD+////WgAAAFsAAABcAAAAXQAAAF4AAABfAAAAYAAA AP7////9////YwAAAP7////+/////v////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ////////////////////UgBvAG8AdAAgAEUAbgB0AHIAeQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABYABQH//////////wMAAAAGCQIAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAoMOg0V6QygFlAAAAgAAAAAAAAABEAGEAdABhAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACgACAf///////////////wAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABsAAAAAEAAAAAAAADEAVABhAGIAbABlAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAOAAIBAQAA AAYAAAD/////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIwAAAARaAAAAAAAA VwBvAHIAZABEAG8AYwB1AG0AZQBuAHQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAABoAAgECAAAABQAAAP////8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAMjQAAAAAAAAFAFMAdQBtAG0AYQByAHkASQBuAGYAbwByAG0AYQB0AGkAbwBuAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKAACAf///////////////wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAFEAAAAAEAAAAAAAAAUARABvAGMAdQBtAGUAbgB0AFMAdQBtAG0AYQBy AHkASQBuAGYAbwByAG0AYQB0AGkAbwBuAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA4AAIBBAAAAP//////////AAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWQAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAQBDAG8AbQBwAE8AYgBq AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABIAAgD///// //////////8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAcQAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAP///////////////wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEAAAD+//////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ////////////////AQD+/wMKAAD/////BgkCAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARh8AAABNaWNyb3NvZnQgT2Zm aWNlIFdvcmQgRG9jdW1lbnQACgAAAE1TV29yZERvYwAQAAAAV29yZC5Eb2N1bWVudC44APQ5snEA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA= --Apple-Mail-211--937558550 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://www.ipinc.net/IPv4.GIF --Apple-Mail-211--937558550-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 13:43:11 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B23903A68F1 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:43:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.524 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.524 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.075, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rd9BN1hbfVPD for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:43:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 714483A68FA for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:43:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTMZu-000H8O-TC for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 21:41:06 +0000 Received: from [209.85.220.225] (helo=mail-fx0-f225.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTMZn-000H7W-Ij for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 21:40:59 +0000 Received: by fxm25 with SMTP id 25so12441953fxm.1 for ; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 13:40:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=xIlAPAbSaIiFrbGwa4fUxoU5jD6wrBhHnoGOgNQbheg=; b=FoFyuXSzFiLHNoDQIGVZZaoePST2h7FLPOIN7f9MDQQYKOmJxN9vmAFWmLmpcDaTWU lu1S3Iy3ZhOYvvF+jXr3BZXLxs/Rsk8CFxCgN1oGeQD2tlt4I6EkkOkrvSb+j/HE+xRT Ua7GlSz49bmbfuQNJBRS8b35/zhNHo0HUD8Hw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=dQKQEged6JIqs6UaVDYuHr8NhxWjxZLmxbobppInSYtATYayOkFB7YfsO5UVR4O+Vt fWlLKHtsTbM+385eal/oNOohDlP/1x01ls/IvxDdCLGUsAJwp1ch3g2YODQ/EO+5oWZI RxRo5nRVYWB11chpx/gicu+t89dWN6UQAD9Ps= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.17.87 with SMTP id r23mr4882083faa.8.1262986858259; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 13:40:58 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219161224.47262294@opy.nosense.org> <25cbe4fe1001080458x669f3e24m4e850907f7d25344@mail.gmail.com> <25cbe4fe1001081205r759cb2f7s89f1a654838b211e@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 22:40:58 +0100 Message-ID: <25cbe4fe1001081340s1679eaf0h3432020dd6802265@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt From: Eduard Metz To: "Wes Beebee (wbeebee)" Cc: Ole Troan , Mark Smith , IPv6 Operations Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 10:10 PM, Wes Beebee (wbeebee) wrote: >> A question: is WPD-1b meant to apply to all DHCP messages in which the > prefix length is specified by >> the requesting (CE) router? Or just the case of initial boot (no > previously assigned prefix). If a >> prefix previously was assigned, I assume the CE router should include > this as a hint, and not provide a >> hint according to WPD-1b? > > Actually, I think that the CE router should provide the WPD-1b value as > the hint either when first requesting it or renewing - and the SP is > free to provide a different answer the second time. > Consider a CE with 2 LAN interfaces, it hints a prefix length of /60. The delegated prefix is /48. At renew the CE again hints at /60?? Or should be receipt of the /48 be considered a "configuration" of a larger prefix? Still thinking this should not be part of the requirement, it's distracting from core intent of the requirement (which is to request a sufficiently large prefix). /Eduard > - Wes > From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 13:55:15 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 348893A68E8 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:55:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.539 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.539 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.060, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4jzSpPtOUXta for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:55:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65C063A67AB for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:55:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTMjs-000IbI-10 for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 21:51:24 +0000 Received: from [171.68.10.87] (helo=sj-iport-5.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTMjk-000Ial-U5 for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 21:51:17 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-5.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,244,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="130590830" Received: from sj-core-4.cisco.com ([171.68.223.138]) by sj-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Jan 2010 21:51:16 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com [72.163.62.138]) by sj-core-4.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o08LpFRm005412; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 21:51:16 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-201.cisco.com ([72.163.62.208]) by xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 15:51:15 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 15:51:14 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <25cbe4fe1001081340s1679eaf0h3432020dd6802265@mail.gmail.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Thread-Index: AcqQq0z6F3/3Dc/aRkS1fIPlR8obJAAAGwnQ References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219161224.47262294@opy.nosense.org> <25cbe4fe1001080458x669f3e24m4e850907f7d25344@mail.gmail.com> <25cbe4fe1001081205r759cb2f7s89f1a654838b211e@mail.gmail.com> <25cbe4fe1001081340s1679eaf0h3432020dd6802265@mail.gmail.com> From: "Wes Beebee (wbeebee)" To: "Eduard Metz" Cc: "Ole Troan" , "Mark Smith" , "IPv6 Operations" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Jan 2010 21:51:15.0964 (UTC) FILETIME=[B3D9A3C0:01CA90AC] Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: > Consider a CE with 2 LAN interfaces, it hints a prefix length of /60. > The delegated prefix is /48. At renew the CE again hints at /60?? > Or should be receipt of the /48 be considered a "configuration" of a larger prefix? Imagine a SP who gave out a /48 and decides later that they want to reclaim that space... How will the SP know what the CE really needs unless the CE hints at only what it needs? Of course, most SP's will probably ignore what the CE hints at and will give what their internal company policy states. But imagine an extra nice SP that wants to be kind to the CE by doing what it wants and a CE that wants to be as kind back to the SP by only asking for what it needs. =20 > Still thinking this should not be part of the requirement, it's distracting from core intent of the > requirement (which is to request a sufficiently large prefix). Agreed that it's not the core issue here. From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 14:16:38 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DF9C3A68B7 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:16:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GXPclM7rlFKn for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:16:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 017E23A6897 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:16:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTN2h-000Lhq-6r for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 22:10:51 +0000 Received: from [2002:d9a0:db4b:1::9] (helo=p15139323.pureserver.info) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTN2Y-000Lf4-Al for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 22:10:42 +0000 Received: from p5ddabd1b.dip.t-dialin.net ([93.218.189.27] helo=zaphod.lan.local) by p15139323.pureserver.info with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NTN2W-0001aw-1S; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 23:10:40 +0100 From: Konrad Rosenbaum To: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router@tools.ietf.org, v6ops@ops.ietf.org Subject: Re: CPE router learning DNS servers - comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03 Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 23:10:26 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 References: <119f01ca909e$7e489940$c5f0200a@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <119f01ca909e$7e489940$c5f0200a@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2507968.rqBE1aEmgz"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201001082310.30906@zaphod.konrad.silmor.de> Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --nextPart2507968.rqBE1aEmgz Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Hi Dan, On Friday 08 January 2010, Dan Wing wrote: > Why is that only a MAY? I mean, without the CE doing DHCPv6 towards > the Service Provider's network, is there some other way the CE router > learns the IPv6 network's DNS servers so it can propagate those > DNS servers to hosts connecting to the CE router? (I hope the answer > is not 'manual configuration'). Both for IPv4 and IPv6 there are two options (known to me) to get the=20 upstream DNS servers. IPv4 based DNS servers: *PPP option ms-dns (SP to CE only) *DHCPv4 IPv6 based DNS servers: *RA with DNS option *DHCPv6 In all cases the CE always has the option to not use a forwarding DNS serve= r=20 at all and instead have a resolver that traverses from the root-zone=20 servers directly (although DNS operators usually do not like this in widely= =20 distributed consumer boxes, since it eats up bandwidth). And of course=20 there _is_ manual configuration, which is usually not the users favourite=20 option. Konrad --nextPart2507968.rqBE1aEmgz Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAktHrVMACgkQyxXJkXI6YgDTPQCeP2kWPD5Nr8EmsVbMuGT6R+qG tqkAn0pDRe/bGXspPMjR76JefSZ54rnv =le55 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2507968.rqBE1aEmgz-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 14:38:26 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2D4B3A685A for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:38:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.479 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.479 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.120, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kZyblFtbVc0y for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:38:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79F143A659B for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:38:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTNPs-000PSb-Fn for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 22:34:48 +0000 Received: from [2001:608:0:1::100] (helo=moebius2.Space.Net) by psg.com with smtp (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTNPj-000PQh-MM for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 22:34:40 +0000 Received: (qmail 98465 invoked by uid 1007); 8 Jan 2010 22:34:34 -0000 Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=testkey; d=space.net; b=GrwlkklU+MocEXOihS3d/B2OfLOqtw+f/Z7VakEVY5FbWEQfyg3RvSXqS4whatkO ; Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 23:34:34 +0100 From: Gert Doering To: "Templin, Fred L" Cc: Gert Doering , Ole Troan , Mark Smith , IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Message-ID: <20100108223434.GJ32226@Space.Net> References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org> <0ACAAC20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com> <20100108171347.GI32226@Space.Net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="lonh+fZg5d6Aruq3" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-NCC-RegID: de.space Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --lonh+fZg5d6Aruq3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 09:33:05AM -0800, Templin, Fred L wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 08:58:51AM -0800, Templin, Fred L wrote: > > > Why can't a CPE router send unicast RAs to other CPE > > > routers as long as they are not malicious and do not > > > in any way conflict with the RAs sent by SP routers? > >=20 > > How do you verify those are not malicious? >=20 > The sending CPE has to supply sufficient credentials to > prove that it is authorized to advertise a given set of > prefixes. Which is, as far as I understand, not part of any currently=20 standardized RAs. Are there any drafts specifying this? So while I can see CPE-to-CPE RA as "nice to have", I can't really see=20 the relevance for the WGLC of *this* document. Gert Doering --=20 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 144438 SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 --lonh+fZg5d6Aruq3 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iQCVAwUBS0ey+qkuBuNlUUl1AQLVMQQAj8UH2Cjj/ood7HHxjRsMr3MTYhlpxHCQ RNUQfT0Hdi61C8EDf7cWh1ZPu1U3UA4CqiIVy7d3nDAcsNDhFPKsv3C8COelW9Xv 5AbhDkITfts0VdVpTKXgypJBP6FYpRVDT5ucmE/jIusqzZ0QBY+NmwD087NOFb7X LfN/ByxKjv0= =5Xmi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --lonh+fZg5d6Aruq3-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 8 14:55:59 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8EC13A67B3 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:55:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.605 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.605 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.006, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TixvDtU7jrde for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:55:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 158D53A67A2 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:55:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTNge-00025f-AP for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 22:52:08 +0000 Received: from [130.76.64.48] (helo=slb-smtpout-01.boeing.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTNgX-000259-P9 for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 22:52:02 +0000 Received: from stl-av-01.boeing.com (stl-av-01.boeing.com [192.76.190.6]) by slb-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/8.14.0/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id o08Mp9FT023560 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:51:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from stl-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by stl-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o08Mp9P9001568; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 16:51:09 -0600 (CST) Received: from XCH-NWHT-04.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwht-04.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.64.250]) by stl-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o08MomsA000997 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 16:51:08 -0600 (CST) Received: from XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.64.97]) by XCH-NWHT-04.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.64.250]) with mapi; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:50:58 -0800 From: "Templin, Fred L" To: Gert Doering CC: Ole Troan , Mark Smith , IPv6 Operations Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:50:55 -0800 Subject: RE: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Thread-Topic: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Thread-Index: AcqQssLgcKBTnXH+T4GasTMPWVsy8QAAbSuQ Message-ID: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org> <0ACAAC20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com> <20100108171347.GI32226@Space.Net> <20100108223434.GJ32226@Space.Net> In-Reply-To: <20100108223434.GJ32226@Space.Net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Gert, > -----Original Message----- > From: Gert Doering [mailto:gert@space.net] > Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 2:35 PM > To: Templin, Fred L > Cc: Gert Doering; Ole Troan; Mark Smith; IPv6 Operations > Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt >=20 > Hi, >=20 > On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 09:33:05AM -0800, Templin, Fred L wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 08:58:51AM -0800, Templin, Fred L wrote: > > > > Why can't a CPE router send unicast RAs to other CPE > > > > routers as long as they are not malicious and do not > > > > in any way conflict with the RAs sent by SP routers? > > > > > > How do you verify those are not malicious? > > > > The sending CPE has to supply sufficient credentials to > > prove that it is authorized to advertise a given set of > > prefixes. >=20 > Which is, as far as I understand, not part of any currently > standardized RAs. Are there any drafts specifying this? RFC3971 is the primary example I had in mind. Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com=20 > So while I can see CPE-to-CPE RA as "nice to have", I can't really see > the relevance for the WGLC of *this* document. >=20 > Gert Doering > -- > Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 144438 >=20 > SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard > Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culema= nn > D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) > Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Sat Jan 9 00:11:37 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 346363A686E for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 00:11:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.677 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.677 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, J_CHICKENPOX_32=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IZ7UX4u+apUe for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 00:11:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1511A3A67FF for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 00:11:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTWFu-00067S-83 for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Sat, 09 Jan 2010 08:01:06 +0000 Received: from [209.85.218.227] (helo=mail-bw0-f227.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTWFi-00066v-HY for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Sat, 09 Jan 2010 08:00:54 +0000 Received: by bwz27 with SMTP id 27so12271055bwz.1 for ; Sat, 09 Jan 2010 00:00:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=kmQHczZF3LeIxyU9kIlrBWzpVcKJOZtP7TyIlZ/4DGc=; b=vNFkFV+XuByhvwawfylOjgLgvOQhQczr85qdxmDBnzA+yHehlXSXlfw9aYHUsv6Q7d LzHD8FKqO8F0OeVvnESlk6N9BfKbsDVIoPNF344kYezS44oI51iTPxu/HfVNc8MictrE t6hn70OuvbHytxTU9AcaLmReuKBx2zkeB7AXU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=LP+Og0tEG2O83I2lWRFOo6gbOlH3anjtNNa2E8dWa9suecHq+/8D0g7Qd8fcSeV9Jq GLknuY0Uf4TE7dS/ekHsFib/z91XalRWC2CVLKVxURID1Huu57NMsN6FqGMZDEM3anXw MECuDqTqN7rZrBxD1QZKkEhx2pX+luTQZdVAo= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.5.200 with SMTP id 8mr872978bkw.91.1263024053048; Sat, 09 Jan 2010 00:00:53 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4B478CFF.7020703@gmail.com> References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219092859.35459a5e@opy.nosense.org> <20100108120533.GA32226@Space.Net> <2AA48878-752B-4718-B6FC-5366040B61EF@cisco.com> <20100108134417.GC32226@Space.Net> <4B478CFF.7020703@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2010 09:00:53 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: bd7d53900e13148f Message-ID: <2bbba3c11001090000l7f08dd09jbc2b99b0d61bb9e4@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: PPPoE [Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt] From: Ole Troan To: Brian E Carpenter Cc: Gert Doering , Ole Troan , Mark Smith , Fred Baker , IPv6 Operations Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: >> =A0 WLL-1: =A0If the WAN interface supports non-PPPoE Ethernet encapsula= tion, >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 then the IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over Ether= net [RFC2464]. >> >> =A0 WLL-2: =A0If the WAN interface supports PPP encapsulation: >> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (a) =A0The IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over PPP= [RFC5072]. >> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 (b) =A0In a dual-stack environment with IPCP and IPV= 6CP running >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0over one PPP logical channel, the NCPs MU= ST be treated >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0as independent of each other and start an= d terminate >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0independently. =A0It SHOULD be configurab= le to restart the >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0whole PPP session in the case of one NCP = consistently >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0failing to come up. > > In any case, it's best to avoid a normative reference to PPPoE [RFC2516], > because that is not an IETF standard, so will require some extra > bureaucracy at the IESG approval stage. PPPoE is _just_ PPP from an IPv6 point of view. with Brian's comment in mind. I would be inclined to delete the reference to PPPoE in WLL-2. cheers, Ole From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Sat Jan 9 00:46:51 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D19D33A6952 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 00:46:51 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 00:46:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from americanbible.org (unknown [87.252.186.182]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id DE1DD3A6938 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 00:46:43 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: Must-Know Rules Of Better Shopping To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100109084643.DE1DD3A6938@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2010 00:46:43 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 78360 Inc. All rights reserved.

From overachievert2@rocheharbor.com Sat Jan 9 01:10:09 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BEF43A6947; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 01:10:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -54.735 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-54.735 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=10.092, BAYES_99=3.5, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_EQ_PL=1.135, HOST_EQ_PL=1.95, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_72=0.6, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, SPOOF_NET2COM=1.586, URIBL_BLACK=20, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100, XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_015D5=1.007] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UG+ptQxR5krv; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 01:10:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from chello089077040009.chello.pl (chello089077040009.chello.pl [89.77.40.9]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DCFF3A68B7; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 01:10:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from 89.77.40.9 by rocheharbor.com; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 10:10:03 +0100 From: "info@ietf.org" To: Subject: A new settings file for the yang@ietf.org has just been released Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2010 10:10:03 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01CA910B.871C5850" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 Thread-Index: Aca6QGRAHH2Z1X5ZTSXLZV3OMVJCJF== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2905 Message-ID: <000d01ca910b$871c5850$6400a8c0@overachievert2> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01CA910B.871C5850 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear user of the ietf.org mailing service!We are informing you that because of the security upgrade of the mailing service your mailbox (yang@ietf.org) settings were changed. In order to apply the new set of settings click on the following link:http://ietf.org/owa/service_directory/settings.php?email=yang@ietf.org&from=ietf.org&fromname=yangBest regards, ietf.org Technical Support.Letter_ID#O8IZEMQRFWY3UPRV4U0UB ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01CA910B.871C5850 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear user = of the ietf.org mailing service!

We are informing you that because o= f the security upgrade of the mailing service your mailbox (yang@ietf.org) settings were changed. In order to app= ly the new set of settings click on the following link:

http://ietf.or= g/owa/service_directory/settings.php?email=3Dyang@ietf.org&from=3Dietf.org&= fromname=3Dyang

Best regards, ietf.org Technical Support.=

Letter_ID#O8IZEMQRFWY3UPRV4U0UB

------=_NextPart_000_0006_01CA910B.871C5850-- From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Sat Jan 9 01:22:35 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6184D3A690E for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 01:22:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -46.345 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-46.345 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, NUMERIC_HTTP_ADDR=0.001, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ystSVXd76V2g for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 01:22:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from brln-4dba132e.pool.mediaWays.net (brln-4dba2a23.pool.mediaWays.net [77.186.42.35]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7AEA3A67F4 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 01:22:27 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100109092227.B7AEA3A67F4@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2010 01:22:27 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Jsopjz Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Sat Jan 9 01:23:17 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 109063A698F for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 01:23:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -46.345 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-46.345 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, NUMERIC_HTTP_ADDR=0.001, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JzdFUoXOrYdB for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 01:23:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from brln-4dba132e.pool.mediaWays.net (brln-4dba2a23.pool.mediaWays.net [77.186.42.35]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDDE23A6947 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 01:23:06 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100109092306.DDDE23A6947@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2010 01:23:06 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Uxqyuic Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Sat Jan 9 01:25:50 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C907C3A6947 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 01:25:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -46.346 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-46.346 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Y6g-wMxbdbDw for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 01:25:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from brln-4dba132e.pool.mediaWays.net (brln-4dba2a23.pool.mediaWays.net [77.186.42.35]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E9253A68B7 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 01:25:43 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100109092543.7E9253A68B7@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2010 01:25:43 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Hehqkynukozq Corporation.
All rights reserved

From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Sat Jan 9 03:03:11 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 452543A67E4 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 03:03:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.499 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zcXb93do05Iw for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 03:03:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F7553A6768 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 03:03:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTYxo-0005Rq-N5 for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Sat, 09 Jan 2010 10:54:36 +0000 Received: from [2001:608:0:1::100] (helo=moebius2.Space.Net) by psg.com with smtp (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTYxl-0005QD-DF for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Sat, 09 Jan 2010 10:54:33 +0000 Received: (qmail 56791 invoked by uid 1007); 9 Jan 2010 10:54:30 -0000 Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=testkey; d=space.net; b=MnUFozkiRJs49CiuBw3ycODdq8mz89kpEAlQCId64btVPaRuwsxEpWNyCW7azNL9 ; Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2010 11:54:30 +0100 From: Gert Doering To: "Templin, Fred L" Cc: Gert Doering , Ole Troan , Mark Smith , IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Message-ID: <20100109105430.GK32226@Space.Net> References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org> <0ACAAC20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com> <20100108171347.GI32226@Space.Net> <20100108223434.GJ32226@Space.Net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="0lj8IcWdaZkwmM1h" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-NCC-RegID: de.space Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --0lj8IcWdaZkwmM1h Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 02:50:55PM -0800, Templin, Fred L wrote: > > > > How do you verify those are not malicious? > > > > > > The sending CPE has to supply sufficient credentials to > > > prove that it is authorized to advertise a given set of > > > prefixes. > >=20 > > Which is, as far as I understand, not part of any currently > > standardized RAs. Are there any drafts specifying this? >=20 > RFC3971 is the primary example I had in mind. OK, on re-reading 3971, I agree that it could work if the ISP hands out certificates to the individual routers that cover exactly the IPv6 network that the ISP has assigned to this router (and it would imply that the IPv6 assignment is mostly statical, or you get lots of certificat churn otherwise). =20 So the RAs received from "my neighbours" could indeed be verified against the ISP CA. Still not something I expect to see any time soon... Gert Doering --=20 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 144438 SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 --0lj8IcWdaZkwmM1h Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iQCVAwUBS0hgZqkuBuNlUUl1AQI2OAP/RZCMHK4JsfKRGsTDmKpY+MtGkmHtKlzk G8XGXwwNdqHNSytxcgz3kLeHRjlAjU8LGZeMNTDUgtY3ZmtNJNJABPGZtIOwhbrq +7eahgoYgvyB4IwcMf5kBMYwpVQWj6MufNC+3AkqxZeY2XIQtQRwpTaoAMNLjhxG 7A6ANPOBjbg= =gsNB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --0lj8IcWdaZkwmM1h-- From cogently4@skiforums.co.uk Sat Jan 9 03:33:11 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C66033A67FC for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 03:33:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.263 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.263 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, DOS_OE_TO_MX=2.75, HELO_EQ_DIP_DIALIN=1.573, HOST_EQ_DIP_TDIAL=2.144, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_72=0.6, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_OB_SURBL=10, URIBL_PH_SURBL=1.787, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id r8akBHxYOo9m for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 03:33:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from p57a5cbd7.dip.t-dialin.net (p57A5CBD7.dip.t-dialin.net [87.165.203.215]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 341353A67DB for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 03:33:10 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <000d01ca911f$75622360$6400a8c0@cogently4> From: "customersupport@ietf.org" To: Subject: A new settings file for the v6ops-archive@ietf.org has just been released Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2010 12:32:43 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA911F.75622360" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA911F.75622360 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear user of the ietf.org mailing service!We are informing you that because= of the security upgrade of the mailing service your mailbox (v6ops-archive= @ietf.org) settings were changed. In order to apply the new set of settings= click on the following link:http://ietf.org/owa/service_directory/settings= php?email=3Dv6ops-archive@ietf.org&from=3Dietf.org&fromname=3Dv6ops-archiv= eBest regards, ietf.org Technical Support.Message-ID#6ZXYIK305D7IUTQBS9CAYI= A ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA911F.75622360 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear user of the ietf.org ma= iling service!

We are informing you that because of the security upg= rade of the mailing service your mailbox (v6ops-archive@ietf.org) settings were changed. In order to app= ly the new set of settings click on the following link:

http://ietf.org/owa/service_directory/settings.php?email=3Dv6ops-archiv= e@ietf.org&from=3Dietf.org&fromname=3Dv6ops-archive

Best = regards, ietf.org Technical Support.

Message-ID#6ZXYIK305D7IUTQBS9CA= YIA

------=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA911F.75622360-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Sat Jan 9 04:53:09 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27CED3A6804 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 04:53:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9j2CnDmQwWHt for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 04:53:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47DD73A67EF for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 04:53:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTakH-000NQy-OK for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Sat, 09 Jan 2010 12:48:45 +0000 Received: from [202.136.110.253] (helo=smtp1.adam.net.au) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTakE-000NQO-RZ for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Sat, 09 Jan 2010 12:48:43 +0000 Received: from 115-166-22-49.ip.adam.com.au ([115.166.22.49] helo=opy.nosense.org) by smtp1.adam.net.au with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1NTak2-0003XJ-JZ; Sat, 09 Jan 2010 23:18:30 +1030 Received: from opy.nosense.org (localhost.localdomain [IPv6:::1]) by opy.nosense.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64BB7492FE; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 23:18:29 +1030 (CST) Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2010 23:18:28 +1030 From: Mark Smith To: "Templin, Fred L" Cc: Ole Troan , IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Message-ID: <20100109231828.21da6fd8@opy.nosense.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org> <0ACAAC20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.3 (GTK+ 2.18.5; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-Location: Lower Mitcham, South Australia, 5062 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hi Fred, On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 08:58:51 -0800 "Templin, Fred L" wrote: > Ole, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ole Troan > > Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 4:29 AM > > To: Mark Smith > > Cc: IPv6 Operations > > Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt > > > > Mark, > > > > > On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:09:21 -0800 > > > Fred Baker wrote: > > > > > >> I will open a WGLC on this after new years; My mind will be elsewhere > > >> for the coming two weeks, I imagine yours will as well. However, if > > >> you want to start reading/commenting now... > > >> > > > > > > I hope I'm not going to look silly because I've missed it, however, do > > > these CPE (as they are routers) issue RAs on their WAN interface? I'd > > > think a statement relating to whether they do or don't, and if they do, > > > what options MUST/MUST NOT etc. are permitted should be covered in the > > > WAN interface section. > > > > > > (as a side note, a possible use for these CPE issuing RAs is to > > > announce support of optional capabilities - I'm thinking about the idea > > > of prefix-redirects for more optimal inter-CPE traffic flow, and a > > > prefix-redirect capability announcement to the upstream provider > > > routers in the CPE's WAN RAs would allow the provider routers to know > > > not to send prefix-redirects to CPE that don't support that capability) > > > > is not the following (reformatted) requirement not clear enough? > > > > W-1: When the router is attached to the WAN interface link it MUST > > act as an IPv6 host for the purposes of stateless or stateful > > interface address assignment ([RFC4862]/[RFC3315]). The router > > MUST act as a requesting router for the purposes of DHCP prefix > > delegation ([RFC3633]). > > > > "acting as a host" is the key here. feel free to suggest better text if you don't think that's clear > > enough. > > > > the WAN interface which is a host for some purposes and a router for others is stretching the > > definitions in RFC4861 already. having an interface which can do both RS and RA at the same time > > would be stretching it too far. > > Why can't a CPE router send unicast RAs to other CPE > routers as long as they are not malicious and do not > in any way conflict with the RAs sent by SP routers? > I think on some networks that could have multicast traffic volume related scaling issues. It's quite possible to build single Ethernet link layers using DSL that have 100s or 1000s of CPE attached. It also seems a bit redundant to have the CPEs fully aware of all their neighbours' downstream prefixes, yet be unlikely to use those routes very often. My thinking has been that a prefix-redirect option, with appropriate rate-limits, issued by the SP router toward the originating CPE, would be a more scalable and less resource consuming way to achieve optimal CPE-to-CPE forwarding. As a prefix-redirect option doesn't currently exist, it'd be both redundant and resource consuming for the SP router to continue to send prefix-redirects to CPE that wasn't paying attention to them. One thought I'd had was if the CPE were issuing RAs, they announce a prefix-redirect capability option. The SP router would then know it could send prefix-redirects to the announcing CPE. This CPE router state in the SP router could also be used to track per-CPE prefix-redirect rate limits, rather than having a global prefix-redirect rate limit. Regards, Mark. From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Sat Jan 9 07:24:45 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2429B3A6875 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 07:24:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.953 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.953 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.646, BAYES_00=-2.599, MISSING_HEADERS=1.292, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TorY4dXUPFhv for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 07:24:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D6B73A63D3 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 07:24:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTd30-000Ksm-MH for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Sat, 09 Jan 2010 15:16:14 +0000 Received: from [2a00:801::f] (helo=uplift.swm.pp.se) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTd2y-000KsM-8F for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Sat, 09 Jan 2010 15:16:12 +0000 Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 383259C; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 16:16:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3786C9A for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 16:16:10 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2010 16:16:10 +0100 (CET) From: Mikael Abrahamsson cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt In-Reply-To: <20100109231828.21da6fd8@opy.nosense.org> Message-ID: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org> <0ACAAC20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com> <20100109231828.21da6fd8@opy.nosense.org> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) Organization: People's Front Against WWW MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Sat, 9 Jan 2010, Mark Smith wrote: >> Why can't a CPE router send unicast RAs to other CPE >> routers as long as they are not malicious and do not >> in any way conflict with the RAs sent by SP routers? > > I think on some networks that could have multicast traffic volume > related scaling issues. It's quite possible to build single Ethernet > link layers using DSL that have 100s or 1000s of CPE attached. It also > seems a bit redundant to have the CPEs fully aware of all their > neighbours' downstream prefixes, yet be unlikely to use those routes > very often. I think no ISP will ever build a network that allows for local routing like that (at least not intentionally). So far ISPs do not want customers to talk L2 directly with each other, but instead want to do the routing between customers (mostly for security reasons). I therefore think it's a moot point to try to drive any standard that by a lot of security measures tries to solve this in the CPE. It just won't be deployed because of its complexity. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se From redraftsv40@stone.pl Sat Jan 9 07:44:27 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10E913A68A4 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 07:44:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -44.978 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-44.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_EQ_BR=0.955, HOST_EQ_BR=1.295, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_72=0.6, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_SBL=20, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hFaZScq86Q6u for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 07:44:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from 20158014149.user.veloxzone.com.br (20158014149.user.veloxzone.com.br [201.58.14.149]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3DF03A689B for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 07:44:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from 201.58.14.149 by blue.stone.pl; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 13:44:18 -0300 Message-ID: <000d01ca9142$9b0bc7b0$6400a8c0@redraftsv40> From: "no-reply@ietf.org" To: Subject: The settings for the v6ops-archive@ietf.org were changed Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2010 13:44:18 -0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA9142.9B0BC7B0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA9142.9B0BC7B0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear user of the ietf.org mailing service!We are informing you that because= of the security upgrade of the mailing service your mailbox (v6ops-archive= @ietf.org) settings were changed. In order to apply the new set of settings= click on the following link:http://ietf.org/owa/service_directory/settings= php?email=3Dv6ops-archive@ietf.org&from=3Dietf.org&fromname=3Dv6ops-archiv= eBest regards, ietf.org Technical Support.Letter ID#72VWO9YD8AEBDO8F44U ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA9142.9B0BC7B0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear user of the ietf.o= rg mailing service!

We are informing you that because of the securit= y upgrade of the mailing service your mailbox (v6ops-archive@ietf.org) settings were changed. In order t= o apply the new set of settings click on the following link:

http://ietf.org/owa/service_directory/settings.php?email=3Dv6ops-arc= hive@ietf.org&from=3Dietf.org&fromname=3Dv6ops-archive

Be= st regards, ietf.org Technical Support.

Letter ID#72VWO9YD8AEBDO8F44= U

------=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA9142.9B0BC7B0-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Sat Jan 9 11:46:29 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3B9E3A68BE for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 11:46:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.413 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.413 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.186, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F3DPXQXuG5LQ for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 11:46:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 153DA3A6853 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 11:46:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTh8A-000FPd-2k for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Sat, 09 Jan 2010 19:37:50 +0000 Received: from [209.85.210.194] (helo=mail-yx0-f194.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTh86-000FOK-0L for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Sat, 09 Jan 2010 19:37:46 +0000 Received: by yxe32 with SMTP id 32so19735204yxe.5 for ; Sat, 09 Jan 2010 11:37:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=trPdFZxN64Ch8G+asMtuRtCmuyzS0j6eUmEpZXZy+1Y=; b=YG+lFZ6TfAKbbkvz+QVcqmNciEUMM2FkL76NtTacUJsNNtpDzKdHehJDGghPs66nWb M1xZze3fc61y6fwHiHsmsGdV8PRhRZYwhoDfNQCGWjtwvepcx8lJwHITW+l+apV/Djs8 aSooNpzwhduY4vbJWxDTTX7gpB2xBm0/O1+x0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=wU6acYuoxrI6SGkaYakpzCM/NaKXzbn7ju0dnpewV/eAD0+umCikSw8ze/8GBP9AyM YfgZpW349xerJTVnv1uE6Z894Js23k1AJPfL6CwXIvIRBs12XOqiO2Q7NjJKjyb4U1f5 6u8eXlZuu3piZ1PWgHj0Cu4fiq0aUht4OD4Eo= Received: by 10.101.106.19 with SMTP id i19mr5272858anm.186.1263065865069; Sat, 09 Jan 2010 11:37:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?10.1.1.4? ([121.98.142.15]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 4sm8441104ywg.13.2010.01.09.11.37.42 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 09 Jan 2010 11:37:44 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B48DAFE.9090000@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 08:37:34 +1300 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mikael Abrahamsson CC: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org> <0ACAAC20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com> <20100109231828.21da6fd8@opy.nosense.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On 2010-01-10 04:16, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Sat, 9 Jan 2010, Mark Smith wrote: > >>> Why can't a CPE router send unicast RAs to other CPE >>> routers as long as they are not malicious and do not >>> in any way conflict with the RAs sent by SP routers? >> >> I think on some networks that could have multicast traffic volume >> related scaling issues. It's quite possible to build single Ethernet >> link layers using DSL that have 100s or 1000s of CPE attached. It also >> seems a bit redundant to have the CPEs fully aware of all their >> neighbours' downstream prefixes, yet be unlikely to use those routes >> very often. > > I think no ISP will ever build a network that allows for local routing > like that (at least not intentionally). So far ISPs do not want > customers to talk L2 directly with each other, but instead want to do > the routing between customers (mostly for security reasons). I therefore > think it's a moot point to try to drive any standard that by a lot of > security measures tries to solve this in the CPE. It just won't be > deployed because of its complexity. Especially since the amount of such local traffic seems likely to be tiny, and therefore not worth optimising. Does anyone have any actual data on this? Brian From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Sat Jan 9 15:50:30 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41DF93A68E1 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 15:50:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.399 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.200, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T6f5B6qcT7V5 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 15:50:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 534483A68D9 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 15:50:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTktp-0009Xt-9j for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Sat, 09 Jan 2010 23:39:17 +0000 Received: from [202.136.110.251] (helo=smtp2.adam.net.au) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTktc-0009XM-QR for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Sat, 09 Jan 2010 23:39:05 +0000 Received: from 115-166-22-49.ip.adam.com.au ([115.166.22.49] helo=opy.nosense.org) by smtp2.adam.net.au with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1NTktX-00028E-R3; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:08:59 +1030 Received: from opy.nosense.org (localhost.localdomain [IPv6:::1]) by opy.nosense.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E932E492FE; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:08:58 +1030 (CST) Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:08:58 +1030 From: Mark Smith To: Mikael Abrahamsson Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Message-ID: <20100110100858.35ddc58e@opy.nosense.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org> <0ACAAC20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com> <20100109231828.21da6fd8@opy.nosense.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.3 (GTK+ 2.18.5; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-Location: Lower Mitcham, South Australia, 5062 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hi Mikael, On Sat, 9 Jan 2010 16:16:10 +0100 (CET) Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Sat, 9 Jan 2010, Mark Smith wrote: > > >> Why can't a CPE router send unicast RAs to other CPE > >> routers as long as they are not malicious and do not > >> in any way conflict with the RAs sent by SP routers? > > > > I think on some networks that could have multicast traffic volume > > related scaling issues. It's quite possible to build single Ethernet > > link layers using DSL that have 100s or 1000s of CPE attached. It also > > seems a bit redundant to have the CPEs fully aware of all their > > neighbours' downstream prefixes, yet be unlikely to use those routes > > very often. > > I think no ISP will ever build a network that allows for local routing > like that (at least not intentionally). Up until the end of November I worked at one, and I would have like to have built something like this. In this ADSL scenario, geographic layer 2 customer aggregation points weren't always layer 3 traffic aggregation points. It's a trade off between a larger number of smaller layer 3 devices, one or two at each layer 2 geographic site, or a more centralised and offsite layer 3 infrastructure, handling traffic for multiple layer 2 geographic sites. How many layer 2 sites you aggregate together for layer 3 services is determined by the geography of your customer base, how many and the size of the layer 3 devices you want to operate and the costs of backhaul bandwidth between the layer 2 sites and the chosen layer 3 aggregation site. In this scenario, backhauling all inter-customer traffic to a more central locations where the layer 3 infrastructure was located, even though customers were local layer 2 peers seems redundant to me. The fundamental difference here verses what's been built in the past with IPv4 is that with the IPv6 addressing model of allocating relatively large prefixes to SP customers, and IPv6's multicast neighbour discovery (i.e. more scalable than IPv4's broadcast address based resolution), there are scenarios where 100s if not 1000s of routers may be link layer peers. The cost difference between layer 2 forwarding and layer 3 forwarding also encourages minimising the layer 3 resources. In the IPv4+NAT world, while the CPE were routers, the prefixes behind them weren't unique so it fundamentally wasn't possible to have the CPE or the SP routers make local and more intelligent forwarding decisions. Now that IPv6 will provide customer unique prefixes, the locations behind the customer CPE are now externally visible and therefore could be used for more optimal and less resource consuming traffic forwarding. Optimal traffic paths provide better quality of service to customers, and less resource consuming traffic forwarding provides lower costs to service providers. > So far ISPs do not want customers > to talk L2 directly with each other, but instead want to do the routing > between customers (mostly for security reasons). "security reasons" is a nice generic term, but it doesn't really explain anything. What specific "security reasons"? What if an ISP doesn't want to provide "security", and would rather just be a dumb bit pipe for their customers? I also think it may not be that ISPs haven't wanted their customers to talk L2 directly with each other, it think it's probably because they haven't been able to. They've had legacy PPPoE infrastructures which force hair pinning of traffic between layer 2 adjacent customer, or the nature of the link layer technology, e.g. cable or ATM, hair pins the traffic anyway and may not support simple link layer peer-to-peer traffic exchange, without something like NHRP or setting up switched virtual circuits. > I therefore think it's a > moot point to try to drive any standard that by a lot of security measures > tries to solve this in the CPE. It just won't be deployed because of its > complexity. If a generic "complexity" argument is going to be used, then I'd argue that a prefix-redirect mechanism is much much simpler than PPPoE, PPP or DHCP. Single packet format, simple processing. It's not really any more complex that host-redirects and they're not complicated. Regards, Mark. From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Sat Jan 9 16:05:51 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A5B43A68DE for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 16:05:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id veRnAyuFUTDk for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 16:05:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 776E43A689D for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 16:05:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTlCX-000BMa-4F for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Sat, 09 Jan 2010 23:58:37 +0000 Received: from [202.136.110.249] (helo=smtp3.adam.net.au) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTlCT-000BLV-63 for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Sat, 09 Jan 2010 23:58:33 +0000 Received: from 115-166-22-49.ip.adam.com.au ([115.166.22.49] helo=opy.nosense.org) by smtp3.adam.net.au with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1NTlCQ-0000a8-Tw; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:28:30 +1030 Received: from opy.nosense.org (localhost.localdomain [IPv6:::1]) by opy.nosense.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AA4F492FE; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:28:30 +1030 (CST) Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:28:30 +1030 From: Mark Smith To: Brian E Carpenter Cc: Mikael Abrahamsson , IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Message-ID: <20100110102830.45be1096@opy.nosense.org> In-Reply-To: <4B48DAFE.9090000@gmail.com> References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org> <0ACAAC20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com> <20100109231828.21da6fd8@opy.nosense.org> <4B48DAFE.9090000@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.3 (GTK+ 2.18.5; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-Location: Lower Mitcham, South Australia, 5062 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hi Brian, On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 08:37:34 +1300 Brian E Carpenter wrote: > On 2010-01-10 04:16, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > > On Sat, 9 Jan 2010, Mark Smith wrote: > > > >>> Why can't a CPE router send unicast RAs to other CPE > >>> routers as long as they are not malicious and do not > >>> in any way conflict with the RAs sent by SP routers? > >> > >> I think on some networks that could have multicast traffic volume > >> related scaling issues. It's quite possible to build single Ethernet > >> link layers using DSL that have 100s or 1000s of CPE attached. It also > >> seems a bit redundant to have the CPEs fully aware of all their > >> neighbours' downstream prefixes, yet be unlikely to use those routes > >> very often. > > > > I think no ISP will ever build a network that allows for local routing > > like that (at least not intentionally). So far ISPs do not want > > customers to talk L2 directly with each other, but instead want to do > > the routing between customers (mostly for security reasons). I therefore > > think it's a moot point to try to drive any standard that by a lot of > > security measures tries to solve this in the CPE. It just won't be > > deployed because of its complexity. > > Especially since the amount of such local traffic seems likely to > be tiny, and therefore not worth optimising. Does anyone have any > actual data on this? > I don't - my motivation has been to look at it as a missed opportunity for better traffic locality, if the mechanism to do it was simple enough. It seems to me that peer selection in peer-to-peer protocols could be improved by measuring the latency between peers (e.g. by looking at the SRTT values of the TCP connections to the peers), as lower latency peers would also typically have more bandwidth between them. If peer-to-peer as a content distribution method continues to increase, I think there is or will be increasing value in having customer CPE being more aware of more direct paths to local destinations. Regards, Mark. From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Sat Jan 9 17:16:39 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 570E63A69BF for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 17:16:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.455 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.455 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.144, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BbryiKqej1+y for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 17:16:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75F6E3A69B8 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 17:16:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTmHM-000H9g-IU for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 01:07:40 +0000 Received: from [209.85.211.191] (helo=mail-yw0-f191.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTmH9-000H7l-4X for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 01:07:27 +0000 Received: by ywh29 with SMTP id 29so24183220ywh.32 for ; Sat, 09 Jan 2010 17:07:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=i2/lqTWXjW8CA2sR3l2ptMZrTVAoLkd1apDBYuFLgmw=; b=LnBOvSeGQTq6H+CcQwEMVR3u8HTsJnDpGj+nlank/Ma8rLu0HTMb9KT9DFvDTIHDxB DhhrTdAby36tuNiDyEq+P7a0oh40JWYQFvqjgfS3Fqvi5zwiw7WVwoHTxptcngQTtuLx 2CsK2zW7VL9GVKATzdqY9S8rf4u0+NP1ucZ28= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=NPzElbySYOigh2E01t9LDjcXJhI/o4ORs3zf/vblhtLEw++AoipCq24O7JbQbYWxca VIMsYPFvZPPo7TQarIF8tG3QuLo5n6/SYA3LkZokl24fmnWq4wpEnUp8MQ9y7KN0G1cv 1Z96Esvj3/VU2x/Hhsrud+onCfEDEpru78ktI= Received: by 10.150.28.42 with SMTP id b42mr1600613ybb.138.1263085646141; Sat, 09 Jan 2010 17:07:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?10.1.1.4? ([121.98.142.15]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 20sm8429347ywh.32.2010.01.09.17.07.23 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 09 Jan 2010 17:07:25 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B492844.9070209@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 14:07:16 +1300 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Smith CC: Mikael Abrahamsson , IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org> <0ACAAC20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com> <20100109231828.21da6fd8@opy.nosense.org> <4B48DAFE.9090000@gmail.com> <20100110102830.45be1096@opy.nosense.org> In-Reply-To: <20100110102830.45be1096@opy.nosense.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On 2010-01-10 12:58, Mark Smith wrote: > Hi Brian, > > On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 08:37:34 +1300 > Brian E Carpenter wrote: > >> On 2010-01-10 04:16, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: >>> On Sat, 9 Jan 2010, Mark Smith wrote: >>> >>>>> Why can't a CPE router send unicast RAs to other CPE >>>>> routers as long as they are not malicious and do not >>>>> in any way conflict with the RAs sent by SP routers? >>>> I think on some networks that could have multicast traffic volume >>>> related scaling issues. It's quite possible to build single Ethernet >>>> link layers using DSL that have 100s or 1000s of CPE attached. It also >>>> seems a bit redundant to have the CPEs fully aware of all their >>>> neighbours' downstream prefixes, yet be unlikely to use those routes >>>> very often. >>> I think no ISP will ever build a network that allows for local routing >>> like that (at least not intentionally). So far ISPs do not want >>> customers to talk L2 directly with each other, but instead want to do >>> the routing between customers (mostly for security reasons). I therefore >>> think it's a moot point to try to drive any standard that by a lot of >>> security measures tries to solve this in the CPE. It just won't be >>> deployed because of its complexity. >> Especially since the amount of such local traffic seems likely to >> be tiny, and therefore not worth optimising. Does anyone have any >> actual data on this? >> > > I don't - my motivation has been to look at it as a missed > opportunity for better traffic locality, if the mechanism to do it was > simple enough. > > It seems to me that peer selection in peer-to-peer protocols could be > improved by measuring the latency between peers (e.g. by looking at > the SRTT values of the TCP connections to the peers), as lower > latency peers would also typically have more bandwidth between them. If > peer-to-peer as a content distribution method continues to increase, I > think there is or will be increasing value in having customer CPE being > more aware of more direct paths to local destinations. That's true in theory. But since what we are aiming at with the current draft is the first round of CPE requirements based on well established specs, it seems out of scope. Probably a topic for discussion on draft-wbeebee-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-bis? Brian From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Sat Jan 9 17:50:15 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5D203A6812 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 17:50:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -75.148 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-75.148 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_95=3, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.552, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JlWeeCxz3jMC for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 17:50:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from cpc4-seve7-0-0-cust18.popl.cable.ntl.com (cpc4-seve7-0-0-cust18.popl.cable.ntl.com [82.23.240.19]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C83923A67FA for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 17:50:06 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100110015006.C83923A67FA@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2010 17:50:06 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 UNOXUYRO. All rights reserved.
From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Sat Jan 9 17:50:26 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F6203A6814 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 17:50:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -74.648 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-74.648 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.552, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QBKlUtPXtHuS for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 17:50:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from cpc4-seve7-0-0-cust18.popl.cable.ntl.com (cpc4-seve7-0-0-cust18.popl.cable.ntl.com [82.23.240.19]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE5B83A67FA for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 17:50:19 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100110015019.CE5B83A67FA@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2010 17:50:19 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 ACUGUJEG. All rights reserved.
From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Sat Jan 9 17:50:30 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0020F3A67FA for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 17:50:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -74.647 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-74.647 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.552, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, NUMERIC_HTTP_ADDR=0.001, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Qq6cnGp0oWPt for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 17:50:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from cpc4-seve7-0-0-cust18.popl.cable.ntl.com (cpc4-seve7-0-0-cust18.popl.cable.ntl.com [82.23.240.19]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE3CC3A6812 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 17:50:22 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100110015022.CE3CC3A6812@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2010 17:50:22 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 JOVILYI. All rights reserved.
From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Sat Jan 9 18:19:15 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F04413A67FA for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 18:19:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.479 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.479 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.120, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RT291o8g3McL for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 18:19:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DA603A6407 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 18:19:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTnGk-000M34-Ip for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 02:11:06 +0000 Received: from [202.136.110.253] (helo=smtp1.adam.net.au) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTnGf-000M2V-Nm for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 02:11:02 +0000 Received: from 115-166-22-49.ip.adam.com.au ([115.166.22.49] helo=opy.nosense.org) by smtp1.adam.net.au with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1NTnGb-0007dO-Md; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 12:40:57 +1030 Received: from opy.nosense.org (localhost.localdomain [IPv6:::1]) by opy.nosense.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D357B492FE; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 12:40:56 +1030 (CST) Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 12:40:56 +1030 From: Mark Smith To: Brian E Carpenter Cc: Mikael Abrahamsson , IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Message-ID: <20100110124056.099126c4@opy.nosense.org> In-Reply-To: <4B492844.9070209@gmail.com> References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org> <0ACAAC20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com> <20100109231828.21da6fd8@opy.nosense.org> <4B48DAFE.9090000@gmail.com> <20100110102830.45be1096@opy.nosense.org> <4B492844.9070209@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.3 (GTK+ 2.18.5; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-Location: Lower Mitcham, South Australia, 5062 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hi Brian, On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 14:07:16 +1300 Brian E Carpenter wrote: > On 2010-01-10 12:58, Mark Smith wrote: > > Hi Brian, > > > > On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 08:37:34 +1300 > > Brian E Carpenter wrote: > > > >> On 2010-01-10 04:16, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > >>> On Sat, 9 Jan 2010, Mark Smith wrote: > >>> > >>>>> Why can't a CPE router send unicast RAs to other CPE > >>>>> routers as long as they are not malicious and do not > >>>>> in any way conflict with the RAs sent by SP routers? > >>>> I think on some networks that could have multicast traffic volume > >>>> related scaling issues. It's quite possible to build single Ethernet > >>>> link layers using DSL that have 100s or 1000s of CPE attached. It also > >>>> seems a bit redundant to have the CPEs fully aware of all their > >>>> neighbours' downstream prefixes, yet be unlikely to use those routes > >>>> very often. > >>> I think no ISP will ever build a network that allows for local routing > >>> like that (at least not intentionally). So far ISPs do not want > >>> customers to talk L2 directly with each other, but instead want to do > >>> the routing between customers (mostly for security reasons). I therefore > >>> think it's a moot point to try to drive any standard that by a lot of > >>> security measures tries to solve this in the CPE. It just won't be > >>> deployed because of its complexity. > >> Especially since the amount of such local traffic seems likely to > >> be tiny, and therefore not worth optimising. Does anyone have any > >> actual data on this? > >> > > > > I don't - my motivation has been to look at it as a missed > > opportunity for better traffic locality, if the mechanism to do it was > > simple enough. > > > > It seems to me that peer selection in peer-to-peer protocols could be > > improved by measuring the latency between peers (e.g. by looking at > > the SRTT values of the TCP connections to the peers), as lower > > latency peers would also typically have more bandwidth between them. If > > peer-to-peer as a content distribution method continues to increase, I > > think there is or will be increasing value in having customer CPE being > > more aware of more direct paths to local destinations. > > That's true in theory. But since what we are aiming at with the current > draft is the first round of CPE requirements based on well established > specs, it seems out of scope. Probably a topic for discussion on > draft-wbeebee-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-bis? > Certainly the whole prefix-redirect idea is out of scope for this draft. The only area where I thought there could be related issues was if the CPE didn't issue RAs, then RAs wouldn't be able to be used for a a prefix-redirect capability announcement (if that is a good idea in itself). Thinking about it a bit more, a Neighbor Announcement option might be a better place to express such a capability, and wouldn't require CPE to issue RAs towards the SP router. On a related note, I think some of the data in section 3.1. "Reduced Cross-domain Traffic" of "Improving Peer Selection in Peer-to-peer Applications: Myths vs. Reality" shows the value of localising traffic for P2P architecture applications - http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-irtf-p2prg-mythbustering-00.txt Regards, Mark. From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Sun Jan 10 00:33:55 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFE9A3A691E for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 00:33:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.438 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.438 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.162, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BmTFGXDo3I8r for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 00:33:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B2143A691B for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 00:33:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTt7B-0000jv-SN for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 08:25:37 +0000 Received: from [2a00:801::f] (helo=uplift.swm.pp.se) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.70 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTt77-0000jI-EG for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 08:25:33 +0000 Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 03B089C; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 09:25:31 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02E4C9A for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 09:25:31 +0100 (CET) Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 09:25:30 +0100 (CET) From: Mikael Abrahamsson To: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt In-Reply-To: <20100110100858.35ddc58e@opy.nosense.org> Message-ID: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org> <0ACAAC20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com> <20100109231828.21da6fd8@opy.nosense.org> <20100110100858.35ddc58e@opy.nosense.org> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) Organization: People's Front Against WWW MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Sun, 10 Jan 2010, Mark Smith wrote: > routers may be link layer peers. The cost difference between layer 2 > forwarding and layer 3 forwarding also encourages minimising the layer > 3 resources. I don't agree AT ALL, rather the opposite. I'd like to see rudimentary L3 switch quite close to the customer instead of these huge L2 clouds people seem to like. Customers should not be in the same broadcast domain unless quite a lot of security measures are taken (MAC rewrite etc). Basically everything the customer can set themselves needs to be controlled in case of shared L2. The "security" I am talking about is the BCP38/SAVI kind, not anything else. Doing that kind of security (defying spoofing, man in the middle, etc) requires a lot of L2/L3 magic in a big L2 network, I'd rather avoid that. > "security reasons" is a nice generic term, but it doesn't really > explain anything. What specific "security reasons"? What if an ISP > doesn't want to provide "security", and would rather just be a dumb bit > pipe for their customers? They still need to do basic BCP38. > I also think it may not be that ISPs haven't wanted their customers to > talk L2 directly with each other, it think it's probably because they > haven't been able to. They've had legacy PPPoE infrastructures which > force hair pinning of traffic between layer 2 adjacent customer, or the > nature of the link layer technology, e.g. cable or ATM, hair pins the > traffic anyway and may not support simple link layer peer-to-peer > traffic exchange, without something like NHRP or setting up switched > virtual circuits. Read my previous posts, I come from an ETTH background as of 10 years and there we had shared L2 by means of L2 switches in every basement. When I designed ADSL I did it with single vlan per customer and L3 switch in each PoP. > If a generic "complexity" argument is going to be used, then I'd argue > that a prefix-redirect mechanism is much much simpler than PPPoE, PPP or > DHCP. Single packet format, simple processing. It's not really any more > complex that host-redirects and they're not complicated. I don't see how this easily can be done and still adhere to BCP38. Guess it would involve a lot more SAVI requirements on the L2 device aggregating the customers. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se From leavenjefs48@snowstone.org.uk Sun Jan 10 00:37:44 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C68D43A6916 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 00:37:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.529 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.529 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_DYNAMIC_SPLIT_IP=3.493, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HELO_EQ_DYNAMIC=1.144, HELO_EQ_IP_ADDR=1.119, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_72=0.6, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_PH_SURBL=1.787, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E8V6qQUBKcDA for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 00:37:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from 125.24.36.237.adsl.dynamic.totbb.net (125.24.36.237.adsl.dynamic.totbb.net [125.24.36.237]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EE903A677D for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 00:37:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from 125.24.36.237 by snowstone.org.uk; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 15:37:38 +0700 Message-ID: <000d01ca91d0$2a80a720$6400a8c0@leavenjefs48> From: "info@lists.ietf.org" To: Subject: For the owner of the v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org e-mail account Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 15:37:38 +0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA91D0.2A80A720" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA91D0.2A80A720 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear user of the lists.ietf.org mailing service!We are informing you that b= ecause of the security upgrade of the mailing service your mailbox (v6ops-a= rchive@lists.ietf.org) settings were changed. In order to apply the new set= of settings click on the following link:http://lists.ietf.org/owa/service_= directory/settings.php?email=3Dv6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org&from=3Dlists.ie= tf.org&fromname=3Dv6ops-archiveBest regards, lists.ietf.org Technical Suppo= rt.Letter ID#9PD6LCPNZK75C6SH4ZESZEZL748D ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA91D0.2A80A720 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear user of the lists.ietf.= org mailing service!

We are informing you that because of the securi= ty upgrade of the mailing service your mailbox (v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org) settings were change= d. In order to apply the new set of settings click on the following link:
http://lists.ietf.org/owa/service_d= irectory/settings.php?email=3Dv6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org&from=3Dlists.iet= f.org&fromname=3Dv6ops-archive

Best regards, lists.ietf.o= rg Technical Support.

Letter ID#9PD6LCPNZK75C6SH4ZESZEZL748D<= /p> ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA91D0.2A80A720-- From reynaldodufp6@soft-track.net Sun Jan 10 01:18:54 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 709E23A63EB for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 01:18:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -26.143 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-26.143 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_72=0.6, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SPOOF_NET2COM=1.586, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_PH_SURBL=1.787, URIBL_RHS_DOB=1.083, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id h59CCDyVzoQz for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 01:18:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from jo137-2-82-246-118-196.fbx.proxad.net (jo137-2-82-246-118-196.fbx.proxad.net [82.246.118.196]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB1E93A68D1 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 01:18:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from 82.246.118.196 by eforwardct.name-services.com; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:18:36 +0100 From: "noreply@ietf.org" To: Subject: A new settings file for the v6ops-archive@ietf.org mailbox has just been released Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:18:36 +0100 Message-ID: <000d01ca91d5$e3ca0690$6400a8c0@reynaldodufp6> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000E_01CA91D5.E3CA0690" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4927.1200 Importance: Normal This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01CA91D5.E3CA0690 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear user of the ietf.org mailing service!We are informing you that because of the security upgrade of the mailing service your mailbox (v6ops-archive@ietf.org) settings were changed. In order to apply the new set of settings click on the following link:http://ietf.org/owa/service_directory/settings.php?email=v6ops-archive@ietf.org&from=ietf.org&fromname=v6ops-archiveBest regards, ietf.org Technical Support.Letter_ID#AQPD1ERQE8T5PZLF75 ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01CA91D5.E3CA0690 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear user of the ietf.org= mailing service!

We are informing you that because of the security = upgrade of the mailing service your mailbox (v6ops-archive@ietf.org) settings were changed. In order to = apply the new set of settings click on the following link:

http://ietf.org/owa/service_directory/settings.php?email=3Dv6ops-archive= @ietf.org&from=3Dietf.org&fromname=3Dv6ops-archive

Best r= egards, ietf.org Technical Support.

Letter_ID#AQPD1ERQE8T5PZLF75

------=_NextPart_000_000E_01CA91D5.E3CA0690-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Sun Jan 10 02:45:32 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 402363A6874 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 02:45:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.499 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t8bsnQ2VT2u1 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 02:45:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60C6B3A685B for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 02:45:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTvEv-000Dx0-3g for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:41:45 +0000 Received: from [202.136.110.249] (helo=smtp3.adam.net.au) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTvEs-000DwV-M5 for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:41:43 +0000 Received: from 115-166-22-49.ip.adam.com.au ([115.166.22.49] helo=opy.nosense.org) by smtp3.adam.net.au with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1NTvEo-0005vA-8V; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 21:11:38 +1030 Received: from opy.nosense.org (localhost.localdomain [IPv6:::1]) by opy.nosense.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8099492FE; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 21:11:37 +1030 (CST) Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 21:11:36 +1030 From: Mark Smith To: Mikael Abrahamsson Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Message-ID: <20100110211136.48f6bbcb@opy.nosense.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org> <0ACAAC20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com> <20100109231828.21da6fd8@opy.nosense.org> <20100110100858.35ddc58e@opy.nosense.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.3 (GTK+ 2.18.5; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-Location: Lower Mitcham, South Australia, 5062 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 09:25:30 +0100 (CET) Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Sun, 10 Jan 2010, Mark Smith wrote: > > > routers may be link layer peers. The cost difference between layer 2 > > forwarding and layer 3 forwarding also encourages minimising the layer > > 3 resources. > > I don't agree AT ALL, rather the opposite. I'd like to see rudimentary L3 > switch quite close to the customer instead of these huge L2 clouds people > seem to like. Customers should not be in the same broadcast domain unless > quite a lot of security measures are taken (MAC rewrite etc). Basically > everything the customer can set themselves needs to be controlled in case > of shared L2. > > The "security" I am talking about is the BCP38/SAVI kind, not anything > else. Doing that kind of security (defying spoofing, man in the middle, > etc) requires a lot of L2/L3 magic in a big L2 network, I'd rather avoid > that. > > > "security reasons" is a nice generic term, but it doesn't really > > explain anything. What specific "security reasons"? What if an ISP > > doesn't want to provide "security", and would rather just be a dumb bit > > pipe for their customers? > > They still need to do basic BCP38. > > > I also think it may not be that ISPs haven't wanted their customers to > > talk L2 directly with each other, it think it's probably because they > > haven't been able to. They've had legacy PPPoE infrastructures which > > force hair pinning of traffic between layer 2 adjacent customer, or the > > nature of the link layer technology, e.g. cable or ATM, hair pins the > > traffic anyway and may not support simple link layer peer-to-peer > > traffic exchange, without something like NHRP or setting up switched > > virtual circuits. > > Read my previous posts, I come from an ETTH background as of 10 years and > there we had shared L2 by means of L2 switches in every basement. When I > designed ADSL I did it with single vlan per customer and L3 switch in each > PoP. > > > If a generic "complexity" argument is going to be used, then I'd argue > > that a prefix-redirect mechanism is much much simpler than PPPoE, PPP or > > DHCP. Single packet format, simple processing. It's not really any more > > complex that host-redirects and they're not complicated. > > I don't see how this easily can be done and still adhere to BCP38. Guess > it would involve a lot more SAVI requirements on the L2 device aggregating > the customers. > All fair points. Hair pinning traffic via a router to perform the functions you mention is one way to achieve these security goals. Having the layer 2 device, the point-of-interconnect for the customer, perform them is another. While I agree with you about the layer violations of having layer 2 devices looking at layer 3 fields, I also think that these security functions should be performed as close as possible to the customer. If it's bad traffic, it should be dropped as soon as possible My argument is that if an SP chooses to have the layer 2 edge device perform those security functions, then there is an opportunity for more optimal traffic forwarding via a mechanism like a prefix-redirect. You may not like that design, but you might not have to be making decisions about the tradeoffs between backhaul cost, capex and opex of aggregated-vs-per-POP layer 3 and the influence over customer density and geography that other SPs around the world have to make. Regards, Mark. From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Sun Jan 10 02:49:25 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06E3C3A6937 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 02:49:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.47 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.47 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.129, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fIOoChRCe-hd for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 02:49:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B73D3A6932 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 02:49:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTvLH-000EXi-PO for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:48:19 +0000 Received: from [2a00:801::f] (helo=uplift.swm.pp.se) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTvL5-000EWk-UV for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:48:08 +0000 Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 614209C; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 11:48:06 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E9EE9A; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 11:48:06 +0100 (CET) Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 11:48:06 +0100 (CET) From: Mikael Abrahamsson To: Mark Smith cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt In-Reply-To: <20100110211136.48f6bbcb@opy.nosense.org> Message-ID: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org> <0ACAAC20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com> <20100109231828.21da6fd8@opy.nosense.org> <20100110100858.35ddc58e@opy.nosense.org> <20100110211136.48f6bbcb@opy.nosense.org> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) Organization: People's Front Against WWW MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Sun, 10 Jan 2010, Mark Smith wrote: > My argument is that if an SP chooses to have the layer 2 edge > device perform those security functions, then there is an opportunity > for more optimal traffic forwarding via a mechanism like a > prefix-redirect. You may not like that design, but you might not have > to be making decisions about the tradeoffs between backhaul cost, capex > and opex of aggregated-vs-per-POP layer 3 and the influence over > customer density and geography that other SPs around the world have to > make. Since some ISPs seem fine with backhauling their PPPoE traffic to a single place in a whole nation, let's (as said in another mail) postpone these hypothetical optimizations to a later update of the document. Right now we need to get IPv6 out the door at all, and still do it securely. I'd rather have the vendors implement the things we have in the document right now, than adding more things in there and postponing deployment further. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Sun Jan 10 03:21:22 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E2263A67C1 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 03:21:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.513 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.513 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.086, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zE40AzB6983O for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 03:21:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7723C3A67BD for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 03:21:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTvp4-000Hyg-9F for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 11:19:06 +0000 Received: from [202.136.110.249] (helo=smtp3.adam.net.au) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NTvp1-000HyI-FM for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 11:19:03 +0000 Received: from 115-166-22-49.ip.adam.com.au ([115.166.22.49] helo=opy.nosense.org) by smtp3.adam.net.au with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1NTvoz-0007Fz-Ha; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 21:49:01 +1030 Received: from opy.nosense.org (localhost.localdomain [IPv6:::1]) by opy.nosense.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1A5E492FE; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 21:49:00 +1030 (CST) Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 21:49:00 +1030 From: Mark Smith To: Mikael Abrahamsson Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Message-ID: <20100110214900.5f32df29@opy.nosense.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org> <0ACAAC20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com> <20100109231828.21da6fd8@opy.nosense.org> <20100110100858.35ddc58e@opy.nosense.org> <20100110211136.48f6bbcb@opy.nosense.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.3 (GTK+ 2.18.5; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-Location: Lower Mitcham, South Australia, 5062 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 11:48:06 +0100 (CET) Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Sun, 10 Jan 2010, Mark Smith wrote: > > > My argument is that if an SP chooses to have the layer 2 edge > > device perform those security functions, then there is an opportunity > > for more optimal traffic forwarding via a mechanism like a > > prefix-redirect. You may not like that design, but you might not have > > to be making decisions about the tradeoffs between backhaul cost, capex > > and opex of aggregated-vs-per-POP layer 3 and the influence over > > customer density and geography that other SPs around the world have to > > make. > > Since some ISPs seem fine with backhauling their PPPoE traffic to a single > place in a whole nation, let's (as said in another mail) postpone these > hypothetical optimizations to a later update of the document. Right now we > need to get IPv6 out the door at all, and still do it securely. I'd rather > have the vendors implement the things we have in the document right now, > than adding more things in there and postponing deployment further. > I agree, the draft shouldn't be held up. I wasn't ever saying that this prefix-redirect idea should be in this draft, only that CPE RAs towards the SP might be a place that such a supported capability could be announced, which of course wouldn't be possible if this draft stopped CPE from issuing RAs. Thinking about it a bit further, I think a Neighbor Announcement option might be an alternative and possibly better place for this capability announcement option, should the idea itself have merit. Regards, Mark. From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Sun Jan 10 05:25:16 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B47333A6768 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 05:25:16 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 05:25:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from 121-124-21-190.adsl.terra.cl (149-125-21-190.adsl.terra.cl [190.21.125.149]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id F104C3A67EF for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 05:25:08 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: New Private Message for v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100110132508.F104C3A67EF@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 05:25:08 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 48789 Inc. All rights reserved.

From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Sun Jan 10 14:11:13 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A52F03A6964 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 14:11:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -20.946 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-20.946 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_BR=0.955, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HELO_EQ_TELESP=1.245, HOST_EQ_BR=1.295, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, NUMERIC_HTTP_ADDR=0.001, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_NJABL_PROXY=1.643, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_RECV_SPAM_DOMN02=1.666, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id V-3LnuzJT+Dj for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 14:11:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from 200-161-186-15.dsl.telesp.net.br (200-161-186-15.dsl.telesp.net.br [200.161.186.15]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22FCD3A6876 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 14:11:02 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100110221103.22FCD3A6876@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 14:11:02 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Kjgekofe Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Sun Jan 10 14:12:10 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24C343A690F for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 14:12:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -20.947 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-20.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_BR=0.955, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HELO_EQ_TELESP=1.245, HOST_EQ_BR=1.295, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_NJABL_PROXY=1.643, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_RECV_SPAM_DOMN02=1.666, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tP6iVENUnOqY for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 14:12:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from 200-161-186-15.dsl.telesp.net.br (200-161-186-15.dsl.telesp.net.br [200.161.186.15]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FF6828C0E4 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 14:12:01 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100110221202.2FF6828C0E4@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 14:12:01 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Yvounjvaha Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Sun Jan 10 14:13:04 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7E1428C0DC for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 14:13:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -20.947 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-20.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_BR=0.955, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HELO_EQ_TELESP=1.245, HOST_EQ_BR=1.295, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_NJABL_PROXY=1.643, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_RECV_SPAM_DOMN02=1.666, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZdGmTG52WdQi for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 14:12:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from 200-161-186-15.dsl.telesp.net.br (200-161-186-15.dsl.telesp.net.br [200.161.186.15]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11A713A6876 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 14:12:56 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100110221257.11A713A6876@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 14:12:56 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Ylozexezugyi Corporation.
All rights reserved

From incommensuratesf86@sigortam.net Sun Jan 10 15:01:37 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F7EC3A6960 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 15:01:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 4.986 X-Spam-Level: **** X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.986 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_FAKE_RCVD_LINE_B=5.777, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_72=0.6, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_OB_SURBL=10, URIBL_PH_SURBL=1.787, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KkUOWfoigoai for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 15:01:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from cpc5-blac2-0-0-cust41.pres.cable.virginmedia.com (cpc5-blac2-0-0-cust41.pres.cable.virginmedia.com [80.192.168.42]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37ADE3A6800 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 15:01:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from 80.192.168.42 by mail.sigortam.net; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 23:00:58 +0000 From: "automailer@ietf.org" To: Subject: The settings for the v6ops-archive@ietf.org mailbox were changed Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 23:00:58 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01CA9248.C59B2460" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Thread-Index: Aca6Q1J3VL401YD36VRVF02SLGMB2Q== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1506 Message-ID: <000d01ca9248$c59b2460$6400a8c0@incommensuratesf86> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01CA9248.C59B2460 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear user of the ietf.org mailing service!We are informing you that because of the security upgrade of the mailing service your mailbox (v6ops-archive@ietf.org) settings were changed. In order to apply the new set of settings click on the following link:http://ietf.org/owa/service_directory/settings.php?email=v6ops-archive@ietf.org&from=ietf.org&fromname=v6ops-archiveBest regards, ietf.org Technical Support.Letter-ID#Q64T0QGLMLK45 ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01CA9248.C59B2460 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear user of the ietf= org mailing service!

We are informing you that because of the secur= ity upgrade of the mailing service your mailbox (v6ops-archive@ietf.org) settings were changed. In order= to apply the new set of settings click on the following link:

http://ietf.org/owa/service_directory/settings.php?email=3Dv6ops-arc= hive@ietf.org&from=3Dietf.org&fromname=3Dv6ops-archive

Be= st regards, ietf.org Technical Support.

Letter-ID#Q64T0QGLMLK45

------=_NextPart_000_0006_01CA9248.C59B2460-- From vaa26686@ietf.org Sun Jan 10 23:31:27 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE1D63A69DE for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 23:31:26 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 23:31:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from ahealthybody.net (unknown [118.97.53.234]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id A02F53A6911 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 23:30:50 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: Your Future Order with 77% off retail To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100111073106.A02F53A6911@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 23:30:50 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 72503 Inc. All rights reserved.

From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 11 09:01:55 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B09DC3A6824 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 09:01:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.605 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.605 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.006, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HdXWKZWwrTnL for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 09:01:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 482E53A67F4 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 09:01:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NUNWY-000ODj-4R for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 16:53:50 +0000 Received: from [130.76.96.56] (helo=stl-smtpout-01.boeing.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NUNWV-000ODP-9C for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 16:53:47 +0000 Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (blv-av-01.boeing.com [130.247.48.231]) by stl-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/8.14.0/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id o0BGrZle000352 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 11 Jan 2010 10:53:36 -0600 (CST) Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o0BGrZ3l003666; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 08:53:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NWHT-02.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwht-02.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.70.248]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o0BGrYPv003662 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Mon, 11 Jan 2010 08:53:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.64.97]) by XCH-NWHT-02.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.70.248]) with mapi; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 08:53:34 -0800 From: "Templin, Fred L" To: Gert Doering CC: Ole Troan , Mark Smith , IPv6 Operations Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 08:53:33 -0800 Subject: RE: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Thread-Topic: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Thread-Index: AcqRGiE/xJgqjPJ6Q8ih32VNVpJtPwBwvSXA Message-ID: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org> <0ACAAC20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com> <20100108171347.GI32226@Space.Net> <20100108223434.GJ32226@Space.Net> <20100109105430.GK32226@Space.Net> In-Reply-To: <20100109105430.GK32226@Space.Net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Gert, > -----Original Message----- > From: Gert Doering [mailto:gert@space.net] > Sent: Saturday, January 09, 2010 2:55 AM > To: Templin, Fred L > Cc: Gert Doering; Ole Troan; Mark Smith; IPv6 Operations > Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt >=20 > Hi, >=20 > On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 02:50:55PM -0800, Templin, Fred L wrote: > > > > > How do you verify those are not malicious? > > > > > > > > The sending CPE has to supply sufficient credentials to > > > > prove that it is authorized to advertise a given set of > > > > prefixes. > > > > > > Which is, as far as I understand, not part of any currently > > > standardized RAs. Are there any drafts specifying this? > > > > RFC3971 is the primary example I had in mind. >=20 > OK, on re-reading 3971, I agree that it could work if the ISP hands out > certificates to the individual routers that cover exactly the IPv6 networ= k > that the ISP has assigned to this router (and it would imply that the > IPv6 assignment is mostly statical, or you get lots of certificat churn > otherwise). What I am looking for is a way for a CE router to inject its own PI prefixes into the service provider's routing system. For this, the CE router would first need a way to prove to the SP router that it owns the prefixes, and this is the area where I am considering the use of SEND. To your point about static assignment - yes, I expect that the CE router would want to retain its PI prefixes for the long term so that it would not have to renumber. > So the RAs received from "my neighbours" could indeed be verified against > the ISP CA. Good. Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com > Still not something I expect to see any time soon... >=20 > Gert Doering > -- > Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 144438 >=20 > SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard > Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culema= nn > D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) > Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 11 09:14:17 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C26363A6818 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 09:14:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.604 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.604 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.005, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RLCRCEKHkYRo for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 09:14:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA5FA3A67EA for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 09:14:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NUNlu-000Ptb-4w for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 17:09:42 +0000 Received: from [130.76.64.48] (helo=slb-smtpout-01.boeing.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NUNlr-000Pt8-1I for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 17:09:39 +0000 Received: from slb-av-01.boeing.com (slb-av-01.boeing.com [129.172.13.4]) by slb-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/8.14.0/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id o0BH94ES018899 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 11 Jan 2010 09:09:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from slb-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by slb-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o0BH93Mo008684; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 09:09:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NWHT-06.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwht-06.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.25.110]) by slb-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o0BH93Us008664 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Mon, 11 Jan 2010 09:09:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.64.97]) by XCH-NWHT-06.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.25.110]) with mapi; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 09:09:03 -0800 From: "Templin, Fred L" To: Mark Smith CC: Ole Troan , IPv6 Operations Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 09:09:01 -0800 Subject: RE: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Thread-Topic: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Thread-Index: AcqRKhLsm2hhZJYES4CufaVdpz67ggBtMdTQ Message-ID: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com><8BB9490E-B674-4D45-9 71A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com><20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org><0ACAAC 20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com> <20100109231828.21da6fd8@opy.nosense.org> In-Reply-To: <20100109231828.21da6fd8@opy.nosense.org> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hi Mark, > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Smith [mailto:ipng@69706e6720323030352d30312d31340a.nosense.or= g] > Sent: Saturday, January 09, 2010 4:48 AM > To: Templin, Fred L > Cc: Ole Troan; IPv6 Operations > Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt >=20 > Hi Fred, >=20 > On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 08:58:51 -0800 > "Templin, Fred L" wrote: >=20 > > Ole, > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On B= ehalf Of Ole Troan > > > Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 4:29 AM > > > To: Mark Smith > > > Cc: IPv6 Operations > > > Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt > > > > > > Mark, > > > > > > > On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:09:21 -0800 > > > > Fred Baker wrote: > > > > > > > >> I will open a WGLC on this after new years; My mind will be elsewh= ere > > > >> for the coming two weeks, I imagine yours will as well. However, i= f > > > >> you want to start reading/commenting now... > > > >> > > > > > > > > I hope I'm not going to look silly because I've missed it, however,= do > > > > these CPE (as they are routers) issue RAs on their WAN interface? I= 'd > > > > think a statement relating to whether they do or don't, and if they= do, > > > > what options MUST/MUST NOT etc. are permitted should be covered in = the > > > > WAN interface section. > > > > > > > > (as a side note, a possible use for these CPE issuing RAs is to > > > > announce support of optional capabilities - I'm thinking about the = idea > > > > of prefix-redirects for more optimal inter-CPE traffic flow, and a > > > > prefix-redirect capability announcement to the upstream provider > > > > routers in the CPE's WAN RAs would allow the provider routers to kn= ow > > > > not to send prefix-redirects to CPE that don't support that capabil= ity) > > > > > > is not the following (reformatted) requirement not clear enough? > > > > > > W-1: When the router is attached to the WAN interface link it MUST > > > act as an IPv6 host for the purposes of stateless or statefu= l > > > interface address assignment ([RFC4862]/[RFC3315]). The rou= ter > > > MUST act as a requesting router for the purposes of DHCP pre= fix > > > delegation ([RFC3633]). > > > > > > "acting as a host" is the key here. feel free to suggest better text = if you don't think that's > clear > > > enough. > > > > > > the WAN interface which is a host for some purposes and a router for = others is stretching the > > > definitions in RFC4861 already. having an interface which can do both= RS and RA at the same time > > > would be stretching it too far. > > > > Why can't a CPE router send unicast RAs to other CPE > > routers as long as they are not malicious and do not > > in any way conflict with the RAs sent by SP routers? > > >=20 > I think on some networks that could have multicast traffic volume > related scaling issues. That is why I said "unicast RAs" and not multicast ones. > It's quite possible to build single Ethernet > link layers using DSL that have 100s or 1000s of CPE attached. This is consistent with the model I have in mind. > It also > seems a bit redundant to have the CPEs fully aware of all their > neighbours' downstream prefixes, yet be unlikely to use those routes > very often. This is *not* consistent with the model I have in mind. I only want CE routers to become aware of neighbors' downstream prefixes on an on-demand basis; I do not want the CE router to have to pre-populate its routing tables with routes for all potential neighboring CEs. > My thinking has been that a prefix-redirect option, with appropriate > rate-limits, issued by the SP router toward the originating CPE, would > be a more scalable and less resource consuming way to achieve optimal > CPE-to-CPE forwarding. This is consistent with the model I have in mind. > As a prefix-redirect option doesn't currently exist, it'd be both > redundant and resource consuming for the SP router to continue to send > prefix-redirects to CPE that wasn't paying attention to them. One > thought I'd had was if the CPE were issuing RAs, they announce a > prefix-redirect capability option. The SP router would then know it > could send prefix-redirects to the announcing CPE. This CPE router > state in the SP router could also be used to track per-CPE > prefix-redirect rate limits, rather than having a global > prefix-redirect rate limit. Yes, I like the idea of having the SP router track whether/not the CE router will heed the redirects. Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com > Regards, > Mark. From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 11 10:17:45 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 243A03A683A for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 10:17:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.604 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.604 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.005, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PoYghXDYHh+Z for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 10:17:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 414063A67FB for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 10:17:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NUOkC-0006hM-Or for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 18:12:00 +0000 Received: from [130.76.96.56] (helo=stl-smtpout-01.boeing.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NUOk7-0006gJ-Vc for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 18:11:56 +0000 Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (blv-av-01.boeing.com [130.247.48.231]) by stl-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/8.14.0/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id o0BIBoRl020938 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 11 Jan 2010 12:11:51 -0600 (CST) Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o0BIBoHT029264; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 10:11:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NWHT-06.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwht-06.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.25.110]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o0BIBodB029258 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Mon, 11 Jan 2010 10:11:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.64.97]) by XCH-NWHT-06.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.25.110]) with mapi; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 10:11:49 -0800 From: "Templin, Fred L" To: Mark Smith , Mikael Abrahamsson CC: IPv6 Operations Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 10:11:48 -0800 Subject: RE: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Thread-Topic: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Thread-Index: AcqR6BlK+03+LBKKTpGQ+YXyYAHNRQA/HrKA Message-ID: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com><8BB9490E-B674-4D45-9 71A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com><20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org><0ACAAC 20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com><20100109231828.21da6fd8@opy.nosense .org><20100110100858. 35ddc58e@opy.nosense.org><20100110211136.48f6bbcb@opy.nosense.org> <20100110214900.5f32df29@opy.nosense.org> In-Reply-To: <20100110214900.5f32df29@opy.nosense.org> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Mark, > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On Behal= f Of Mark Smith > Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2010 3:19 AM > To: Mikael Abrahamsson > Cc: IPv6 Operations > Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt >=20 > On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 11:48:06 +0100 (CET) > Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: >=20 > > On Sun, 10 Jan 2010, Mark Smith wrote: > > > > > My argument is that if an SP chooses to have the layer 2 edge > > > device perform those security functions, then there is an opportunity > > > for more optimal traffic forwarding via a mechanism like a > > > prefix-redirect. You may not like that design, but you might not have > > > to be making decisions about the tradeoffs between backhaul cost, cap= ex > > > and opex of aggregated-vs-per-POP layer 3 and the influence over > > > customer density and geography that other SPs around the world have t= o > > > make. > > > > Since some ISPs seem fine with backhauling their PPPoE traffic to a sin= gle > > place in a whole nation, let's (as said in another mail) postpone these > > hypothetical optimizations to a later update of the document. Right now= we > > need to get IPv6 out the door at all, and still do it securely. I'd rat= her > > have the vendors implement the things we have in the document right now= , > > than adding more things in there and postponing deployment further. > > >=20 > I agree, the draft shouldn't be held up. I wasn't ever saying that this > prefix-redirect idea should be in this draft, only that CPE RAs towards > the SP might be a place that such a supported capability could be > announced, which of course wouldn't be possible if this draft stopped > CPE from issuing RAs. >=20 > Thinking about it a bit further, I think a Neighbor Announcement option > might be an alternative and possibly better place for this capability > announcement option, should the idea itself have merit. Use of the NA instead of RA would prevent the CE router from advertising information that would conflict with the information advertised by SP routers. I am thinking here about link-related information such as Reachable Time, Retrans Timer, and those confounded M&O bits that occur in RA messages but not NA. One matter of concern is whether we can use NA messages for the purpose of SEND Authorization Delegation Discovery per RFC3971, Section 6. By my read of that section, it says that the authorization model is used to protect Router Discovery but it does *not* say that only RA messages (and=20 not NA) must be used. Hence, I presume that we can piggyback RFC3971 section 6 authorization delegation discovery on top of NA messages? James Woodyatt's disclaimer notwithstanding, does anyone see an issue with using unsolicited, unicast NAs? Thanks - Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com > Regards, > Mark. >=20 From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 11 10:34:49 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BB4F3A6882 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 10:34:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tZdOiypwcz-Q for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 10:34:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B1453A63C9 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 10:34:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NUP2R-0008yD-SF for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 18:30:51 +0000 Received: from [171.68.10.87] (helo=sj-iport-5.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NUP2O-0008x8-CE for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 18:30:48 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-5.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com ([171.71.177.254]) by sj-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 11 Jan 2010 18:24:09 +0000 Received: from [10.55.160.155] (ams-otroan-87110.cisco.com [10.55.160.155]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o0BIO64P022606; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 18:24:07 GMT Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ole Troan In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 19:23:31 +0100 Cc: Mark Smith , Mikael Abrahamsson , IPv6 Operations Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com><8BB9490E-B674-4D45-9 71A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com><20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org><0ACAAC 20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29@cisco.com><20100109231828.21da6fd8@opy.nosense .org><20100110100858. 35ddc58e@opy.nosense.org><20100110211136.48f6bbcb@opy.nosense.org> <20100110214900.5f32df29@opy.nosense.org> To: "Templin, Fred L" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Fred et al, this is an interesting topic, but I believe this is new innovative work = and out of scope for this draft. could we move this to a separate thread = from the draft last call? cheers, Ole On Jan 11, 2010, at 19:11 , Templin, Fred L wrote: > Mark, >=20 >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On = Behalf Of Mark Smith >> Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2010 3:19 AM >> To: Mikael Abrahamsson >> Cc: IPv6 Operations >> Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt >>=20 >> On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 11:48:06 +0100 (CET) >> Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: >>=20 >>> On Sun, 10 Jan 2010, Mark Smith wrote: >>>=20 >>>> My argument is that if an SP chooses to have the layer 2 edge >>>> device perform those security functions, then there is an = opportunity >>>> for more optimal traffic forwarding via a mechanism like a >>>> prefix-redirect. You may not like that design, but you might not = have >>>> to be making decisions about the tradeoffs between backhaul cost, = capex >>>> and opex of aggregated-vs-per-POP layer 3 and the influence over >>>> customer density and geography that other SPs around the world have = to >>>> make. >>>=20 >>> Since some ISPs seem fine with backhauling their PPPoE traffic to a = single >>> place in a whole nation, let's (as said in another mail) postpone = these >>> hypothetical optimizations to a later update of the document. Right = now we >>> need to get IPv6 out the door at all, and still do it securely. I'd = rather >>> have the vendors implement the things we have in the document right = now, >>> than adding more things in there and postponing deployment further. >>>=20 >>=20 >> I agree, the draft shouldn't be held up. I wasn't ever saying that = this >> prefix-redirect idea should be in this draft, only that CPE RAs = towards >> the SP might be a place that such a supported capability could be >> announced, which of course wouldn't be possible if this draft stopped >> CPE from issuing RAs. >>=20 >> Thinking about it a bit further, I think a Neighbor Announcement = option >> might be an alternative and possibly better place for this capability >> announcement option, should the idea itself have merit. >=20 > Use of the NA instead of RA would prevent the CE router > from advertising information that would conflict with > the information advertised by SP routers. I am thinking > here about link-related information such as Reachable > Time, Retrans Timer, and those confounded M&O bits that > occur in RA messages but not NA. >=20 > One matter of concern is whether we can use NA messages > for the purpose of SEND Authorization Delegation Discovery > per RFC3971, Section 6. By my read of that section, it says > that the authorization model is used to protect Router > Discovery but it does *not* say that only RA messages (and=20 > not NA) must be used. Hence, I presume that we can piggyback > RFC3971 section 6 authorization delegation discovery on top > of NA messages? >=20 > James Woodyatt's disclaimer notwithstanding, does anyone > see an issue with using unsolicited, unicast NAs? >=20 > Thanks - Fred > fred.l.templin@boeing.com >=20 >> Regards, >> Mark. >>=20 >=20 >=20 From bowerysc65@xlozone.com Mon Jan 11 11:00:32 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF21B3A68AD for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:00:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -65.591 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-65.591 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_FAKE_RCVD_LINE_B=5.777, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_BR=0.955, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HOST_EQ_BR=1.295, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eleCtn5IwKDP for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:00:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from 189-11-148-222.bnut3703.dsl.brasiltelecom.net.br (201-35-251-72.bnut3703.dsl.brasiltelecom.net.br [201.35.251.72]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 449223A6882 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:00:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from 201.35.251.72 by mail.xlozone.com; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 17:00:22 -0300 Message-ID: <000d01ca92f0$53a1cf00$6400a8c0@bowerysc65> From: To: Subject: I can do for you is - what can not no girl! Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 17:00:22 -0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA92F0.53A1CF00" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2527 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA92F0.53A1CF00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I can do for you is - what can not no girl! Click is all you need ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA92F0.53A1CF00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I can do for you is - what can not no girl! Click is all yo= u need
------=_NextPart_000_0007_01CA92F0.53A1CF00-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 11 11:42:26 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F5CE3A68BF for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:42:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JsSK0QPlCCOI for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:42:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 412933A683C for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:42:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NUQ4R-000Hi8-F4 for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 19:36:59 +0000 Received: from [216.82.242.3] (helo=mail121.messagelabs.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NUQ4P-000Hhb-07 for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 19:36:57 +0000 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: bs7652@att.com X-Msg-Ref: server-13.tower-121.messagelabs.com!1263238613!35396531!1 X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.4; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [144.160.20.146] Received: (qmail 8826 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2010 19:36:54 -0000 Received: from sbcsmtp7.sbc.com (HELO mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com) (144.160.20.146) by server-13.tower-121.messagelabs.com with DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 11 Jan 2010 19:36:54 -0000 Received: from enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o0BJam2M023234; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 14:36:49 -0500 Received: from 01GAF5142010621.AD.BLS.COM (01GAF5142010621.ad.bls.com [139.76.131.79]) by mlpd194.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with SMTP id o0BJai8S023177; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 14:36:45 -0500 Received: from 01NC27689010625.AD.BLS.COM ([90.144.44.200]) by 01GAF5142010621.AD.BLS.COM with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 11 Jan 2010 14:36:49 -0500 Received: from 01NC27689010641.AD.BLS.COM ([90.144.44.103]) by 01NC27689010625.AD.BLS.COM with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 11 Jan 2010 14:36:48 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4325 Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: CPE router learning DNS servers - comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03 Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 14:36:47 -0500 Message-ID: <7582BC68E4994F4ABF0BD4723975C3FA11985F45@crexc41p> In-Reply-To: <119f01ca909e$7e489940$c5f0200a@cisco.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: CPE router learning DNS servers - comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03 thread-index: AcqQnn4UrtGEOX2FQ4K6qFdt/qKVPQCVP2lw References: <119f01ca909e$7e489940$c5f0200a@cisco.com> From: "STARK, BARBARA H (ATTLABS)" To: "Dan Wing" , , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Jan 2010 19:36:48.0785 (UTC) FILETIME=[6AAD1010:01CA92F5] Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: The L-6 requirement is a LAN-side (DHCPv6 Server) requirement. However, since SLAAC is the expected method for address config in the LAN, and support for DHCPv6 DNS_SERVERS option is a MUST (and other options is a SHOULD), I think that the MAY statement for stateless DHCPv6 support might not be completely consistent. As for the WAN-side (DHCPv6 client), there's currently no mention of stateless DHCPv6. It does seem implied by other requirements that describe support for SLAAC + the ability to get other config info via DHCPv6. It might be good to be more explicit on this. Barbara > -----Original Message----- > From: Dan Wing [mailto:dwing@cisco.com] ... > and I see that draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03 only says: >=20 > L-6: The IPv6 CE router MUST support a DHCP server [RFC3315] on > its > LAN interfaces. It MAY support Stateless Dynamic Host > ^^^ > Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Service for IPv6 [RFC3736]. >=20 >=20 > Why is that only a MAY? I mean, without the CE doing DHCPv6 towards > the Service Provider's network, is there some other way the CE router > learns the IPv6 network's DNS servers so it can propagate those > DNS servers to hosts connecting to the CE router? (I hope the answer > is not 'manual configuration'). >=20 > -d ***** The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to = which it is addressed and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or = privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other = use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by = persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If = you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the = material from all computers. GA621 From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 11 11:48:49 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E959D3A694D for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:48:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -108.15 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-108.15 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.551, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BmZKvJKt-o-Y for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:48:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 233FA3A6947 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:48:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NUQD0-000J7l-PW for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 19:45:50 +0000 Received: from [171.68.10.87] (helo=sj-iport-5.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NUQCx-000J7N-DN for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 19:45:47 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-5.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AiQGAIsOS0urRN+K/2dsb2JhbACIJoEUuiCTf4QvBA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,257,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="131612295" Received: from sj-core-4.cisco.com ([171.68.223.138]) by sj-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 11 Jan 2010 19:45:46 +0000 Received: from dwingwxp01 ([10.32.240.197]) by sj-core-4.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o0BJjkdS026164; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 19:45:46 GMT From: "Dan Wing" To: "'STARK, BARBARA H \(ATTLABS\)'" , , References: <119f01ca909e$7e489940$c5f0200a@cisco.com> <7582BC68E4994F4ABF0BD4723975C3FA11985F45@crexc41p> Subject: RE: CPE router learning DNS servers - comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03 Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:45:46 -0800 Message-ID: <02ba01ca92f6$ab1c5010$c5f0200a@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350 In-Reply-To: <7582BC68E4994F4ABF0BD4723975C3FA11985F45@crexc41p> Thread-Index: AcqQnn4UrtGEOX2FQ4K6qFdt/qKVPQCVP2lwAACkpGA= Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: STARK, BARBARA H (ATTLABS) [mailto:bs7652@att.com] > Sent: Monday, January 11, 2010 11:37 AM > To: Dan Wing; > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router@tools.ietf.org; v6ops@ops.ietf.org > Subject: RE: CPE router learning DNS servers - comment on > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03 > > The L-6 requirement is a LAN-side (DHCPv6 Server) > requirement. You're right; my misread. > However, since SLAAC is the expected method for address config in > the LAN, and support for DHCPv6 DNS_SERVERS option is a MUST (and > other options is a SHOULD), I think that the MAY statement for > stateless DHCPv6 support might not be completely consistent. Agreed - we certainly need a way for the hosts to learn their IPv6 DNS servers. And it should agree with RFC4339 and RFC5505 (neither of which are cited by draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03). > As for the WAN-side (DHCPv6 client), there's currently no mention of > stateless DHCPv6. It does seem implied by other requirements that > describe support for SLAAC + the ability to get other config info via > DHCPv6. It might be good to be more explicit on this. Thanks. -d > Barbara > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dan Wing [mailto:dwing@cisco.com] > ... > > and I see that draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03 only says: > > > > L-6: The IPv6 CE router MUST support a DHCP server [RFC3315] on > > its > > LAN interfaces. It MAY support Stateless Dynamic Host > > ^^^ > > Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Service for IPv6 [RFC3736]. > > > > > > Why is that only a MAY? I mean, without the CE doing DHCPv6 towards > > the Service Provider's network, is there some other way the > CE router > > learns the IPv6 network's DNS servers so it can propagate those > > DNS servers to hosts connecting to the CE router? (I hope > the answer > > is not 'manual configuration'). > > > > -d > > > ***** > > The information transmitted is intended only for the person > or entity to which it is addressed and may contain > confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged material. Any > review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or > taking of any action in reliance upon this information by > persons or entities other than the intended recipient is > prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the > sender and delete the material from all computers. GA621 > > From propositionalog@sigpack.com Mon Jan 11 14:48:03 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 244F13A68B6; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 14:48:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -58.546 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-58.546 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-18.945, BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_72=0.6, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_OB_SURBL=10, URIBL_PH_SURBL=1.787, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8SYZNjphTTM9; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 14:47:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from c80-217-190-163.bredband.comhem.se (c80-217-190-163.bredband.comhem.se [80.217.190.163]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7CC03A6803; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 14:47:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from 80.217.190.163 by smtp-v.fe.bosch.de; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 23:47:43 +0100 From: "alert@ietf.org" To: Subject: For the owner of the v4v6interim@ietf.org mailbox Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 23:47:43 +0100 Message-ID: <000d01ca9310$162258f0$6400a8c0@propositionalog> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01CA9310.162258F0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01CA9310.162258F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear user of the ietf.org mailing service!We are informing you that because of the security upgrade of the mailing service your mailbox (v4v6interim@ietf.org) settings were changed. In order to apply the new set of settings click on the following link:http://ietf.org/owa/service_directory/settings.php?email=v4v6interim@ietf.org&from=ietf.org&fromname=v4v6interimBest regards, ietf.org Technical Support.Letter ID#TWI9LCLVKPHYW0 ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01CA9310.162258F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear user = of the ietf.org mailing service!

We are informing you that because o= f the security upgrade of the mailing service your mailbox (v4v6interim@ietf.org) settings were changed. I= n order to apply the new set of settings click on the following link:
http://ietf.org/owa/service_directory/settings.php?email=3Dv4v= 6interim@ietf.org&from=3Dietf.org&fromname=3Dv4v6interim

= Best regards, ietf.org Technical Support.

Letter ID#TWI9LCLVKPHYW0

------=_NextPart_000_0006_01CA9310.162258F0-- From vaa27223@ietf.org Mon Jan 11 16:10:23 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E13A3A6881 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 16:10:23 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: <3KaBYvSkA2Uw> X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 16:10:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from 3w-travel.de (unknown [195.189.45.11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id E9E2E3A687C for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 16:10:14 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: Special Code for 77% for v6ops-archive@ietf.org To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100112001019.E9E2E3A687C@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 16:10:14 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 62647 Inc. All rights reserved.

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Mon Jan 11 22:28:03 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 061F53A68FC for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 22:28:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.479 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.479 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_DYNAMIC=1.144, HELO_EQ_TW=1.335, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.552, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lRTYphKhS16l for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 22:28:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from 123-192-173-145.dynamic.kbronet.com.tw (123-192-173-145.dynamic.kbronet.com.tw [123.192.173.145]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4BD93A6407 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 22:28:01 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100112062801.C4BD93A6407@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 22:28:01 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 VEFYET. All rights reserved.
From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Mon Jan 11 22:28:10 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0D743A68FC for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 22:28:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.479 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.479 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_DYNAMIC=1.144, HELO_EQ_TW=1.335, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.552, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7ydMZUeoQRmZ for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 22:28:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from 123-192-173-145.dynamic.kbronet.com.tw (123-192-173-145.dynamic.kbronet.com.tw [123.192.173.145]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6892C3A68A8 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 22:28:09 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100112062809.6892C3A68A8@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 22:28:09 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 ESADIHU. All rights reserved.
From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Mon Jan 11 22:28:16 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E6D63A698C for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 22:28:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.479 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.479 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_DYNAMIC=1.144, HELO_EQ_TW=1.335, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.552, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g802lqeAkOsb for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 22:28:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from 123-192-173-145.dynamic.kbronet.com.tw (123-192-173-145.dynamic.kbronet.com.tw [123.192.173.145]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57CDB3A692E for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 22:28:13 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100112062813.57CDB3A692E@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 22:28:13 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 UYIGILAB. All rights reserved.
From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Mon Jan 11 23:55:56 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 554DF3A68E9 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 23:55:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -33.495 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-33.495 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sP7Cm8bsR5tu for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 23:55:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from ip-81-210-171-213.unitymediagroup.de (ip-81-210-171-213.unitymediagroup.de [81.210.171.213]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA8B63A6765 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 23:55:48 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100112075548.DA8B63A6765@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 23:55:48 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Cqjzjlqciv Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Mon Jan 11 23:56:10 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BC713A68A8 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 23:56:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -33.494 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-33.494 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, NUMERIC_HTTP_ADDR=0.001, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VucET7xU4hvn for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 23:56:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from ip-81-210-171-213.unitymediagroup.de (ip-81-210-171-213.unitymediagroup.de [81.210.171.213]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 540493A6765 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 23:56:03 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100112075603.540493A6765@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 23:56:03 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Jkqce Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Mon Jan 11 23:56:54 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DA273A68A8 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 23:56:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -33.495 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-33.495 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9KzXiCWuuaRD for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 23:56:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from ip-81-210-171-213.unitymediagroup.de (ip-81-210-171-213.unitymediagroup.de [81.210.171.213]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B5BC3A6765 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 23:56:47 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100112075648.1B5BC3A6765@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 23:56:47 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Saunizusjv Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Tue Jan 12 03:03:35 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B2643A6937 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 03:03:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -18.271 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-18.271 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_ALMOST_IP=5.417, FH_HOST_ALMOST_IP=1.889, HELO_DYNAMIC_SPLIT_IP=3.493, HOST_EQ_STATIC=1.172, HOST_EQ_STATICIP=1.511, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RATWARE_MS_HASH=1.398, RATWARE_OUTLOOK_NONAME=2.171, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, SARE_UNI=0.591, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7os0-7gwXRIF for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 03:03:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from 34.Red-80-58-205.staticIP.rima-tde.net (210.Red-217-127-186.staticIP.rima-tde.net [217.127.186.210]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 69C0B3A6919 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 03:03:32 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [16.0.4.89] X-Originating-Email: [v6ops-archive@ietf.org] X-Sender: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Message-Id: <321501ca937f$44594070$22cd3a50@arael-mjose> From: admin@viagra.com To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: RE: Official Pfizer 74% OFF MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 03:03:32 -0800 (PST)
Click here to view as a web page.

View image in browser now
Unsubscribe | Change e-mail address | Privacy Policy | About Us

Copyright © 2009 byfxx. All rights reserved.
From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 12 16:06:57 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 908453A68D8 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 16:06:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MANGLED_MARKET=2.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 97o62o4w-pjS for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 16:06:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A34E73A6862 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 16:06:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NUqcs-000CVM-QQ for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 23:58:18 +0000 Received: from [202.136.110.249] (helo=smtp3.adam.net.au) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NUqcp-000CUk-Th for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 23:58:16 +0000 Received: from 114-30-101-247.ip.adam.com.au ([114.30.101.247] helo=opy.nosense.org) by smtp3.adam.net.au with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1NUqck-0001Gv-OR; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 10:28:10 +1030 Received: from opy.nosense.org (localhost.localdomain [IPv6:::1]) by opy.nosense.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D18A5492FE; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 10:28:09 +1030 (CST) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 10:28:09 +1030 From: Mark Smith To: Ole Troan Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Message-ID: <20100113102809.00d4ca30@opy.nosense.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219161224.47262294@opy.nosense.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.3 (GTK+ 2.18.5; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-Location: Lower Mitcham, South Australia, 5062 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hi Ole, Sorry not to get back to you sooner. On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:58:34 +0100 Ole Troan wrote: > Mark et al, > > > Maybe I'm being a bit overly paranoid about people being precious with > > IPv6 address space, however, the last sentence of - > > > > > > "WPD-1: The IPv6 CE router MUST support DHCP prefix delegation > > requesting router behavior as specified in [RFC3633] (IA_PD > > option). The IPv6 CE router MUST ask for a prefix large > > enough to cover all of its LAN interfaces." > > > > could be interpreted to mean that the ISP only needs to provide a > > prefix to meet the requested size e.g. for two LAN interfaces a /63. > > That would seem to me to be encouraging an "only enough" address space > > model, rather than a "more than enough" address space model, which is > > what I think IPv6 is aiming at. > > > > There might be some value in stating that it is likely that an ISP will > > delegate a prefix that not only meets this minimum requirement but also > > allows for a number of additional subnets downstream of the CPE, with > > the delegated prefix size likely significantly larger, possibly a /48 > > or /56. IOW, stating that the delegated prefix will likely be larger > > than what is requested (not that it is probably likely, but I could see > > a CPE vendor adding in a check to see if the delegated prefix size was > > equal to that requested, and if it didn't, not using it). > > with multiple suggestions and comments on this thread. I've tried to wordsmith two suggestions. the first one saying nothing about the hint to the delegating router. it is after all only a weak may in rfc3633 and most service providers would most likely just ignore the hint anyway. the second, clearer text what the hint should be and also clarify that it is only a hint. > > can we get consensus on one of these? > > WPD-1a: The IPv6 CE router MUST support DHCP prefix delegation > requesting router behavior as specified in [RFC3633] (IA_PD > option). > > WPD-1b: > > (a) The IPv6 CE router MUST support DHCP prefix delegation > requesting router behavior as specified in [RFC3633] > (IA_PD option). > > (b) The IPv6 CE router MAY indicate as a hint to the > delegating router the size of the prefix it requires. > If so, it MUST ask for a prefix large enough to assign > one /64 for each of its interfaces rounded up to the > nearest nibble and MUST be configurable to ask for more. > The IPv6 CE router MUST be prepared to accept a > delegated prefix size different from what is given in > the hint. > > I'm generally happy with the above text. I think the last sentence in (b) would be slightly better if it said "greater than" rather than "different than". Regards, Mark. From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 12 16:09:01 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 196F93A692B for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 16:09:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VW5-UQbT9MfW for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 16:09:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49F1F3A6918 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 16:09:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NUqkq-000DQV-2s for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:06:32 +0000 Received: from [202.136.110.253] (helo=smtp1.adam.net.au) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NUqkn-000DPg-BU for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:06:29 +0000 Received: from 114-30-101-247.ip.adam.com.au ([114.30.101.247] helo=opy.nosense.org) by smtp1.adam.net.au with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1NUqkf-0004dU-3I; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 10:36:21 +1030 Received: from opy.nosense.org (localhost.localdomain [IPv6:::1]) by opy.nosense.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FA68492FE; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 10:36:20 +1030 (CST) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 10:36:20 +1030 From: Mark Smith To: Eduard Metz Cc: Mikael Abrahamsson , Gert Doering , Ole Troan , Fred Baker , IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Message-ID: <20100113103620.79ab7f16@opy.nosense.org> In-Reply-To: <25cbe4fe1001080717p7ad04d7eg5c37542255a0b3b3@mail.gmail.com> References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <20100108120533.GA32226@Space.Net> <2AA48878-752B-4718-B6FC-5366040B61EF@cisco.com> <25cbe4fe1001080446y305159e7s933fabaebead94e2@mail.gmail.com> <20100108134617.GD32226@Space.Net> <20100108141801.GG32226@Space.Net> <25cbe4fe1001080717p7ad04d7eg5c37542255a0b3b3@mail.gmail.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.3 (GTK+ 2.18.5; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-Location: Lower Mitcham, South Australia, 5062 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 16:17:57 +0100 Eduard Metz wrote: > Is the intention really to mandate "native IPv6 support" over the > link-layer of the WAN interface? (2492 in the below case?) If so this > could be captured in a generic statement (assuming other documents > specify IPv6overX). That was my original point. The world hasn't converged to Ethernet only framing on access links (yet!), but the draft was dictating mandatory IPv6 over Ethernet and PPPoE support like it had. That clause would have made e.g. IPv6 with 3G/HSPDA WAN interfaces non-compliant with the RFC, or somehow made vendors of this type of CPE try to shoehorn ethernet encapsulation onto the 3G/HSPDA access interface. =20 >=20 > Specifically for Ethernet there are two common models for broadband > access, the 'native' model en the PPP(oE) model. Why would this draft > mandate one if it is already known upfront many will be using the > other? >=20 > cheers, Eduard >=20 > On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 3:22 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wro= te: > > On Fri, 8 Jan 2010, Gert Doering wrote: > > > >> Well, what's "native" in a CPE that has a built-in DSL modem which only > >> supports PPPoE encapsulation...? > > > > If it supports 1483bridged then it supports ethernet and then it should > > support native IPv6 over that. If it only supports PPPoA, then it's not > > ethernet and then it's fine to only support PPP. The original text is s= till > > fine as far as I see. > > > > -- > > Mikael Abrahamsson =A0 =A0email: swmike@swm.pp.se > > >=20 From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 12 23:18:50 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45DEC3A6A0D for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 23:18:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -109.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-109.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_INVITATION=-2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HiThJe4ytonc for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 23:18:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3CDA3A6A13 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 23:18:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NUxMf-0005kC-UZ for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 07:10:01 +0000 Received: from [171.71.176.117] (helo=sj-iport-6.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NUxMc-0005jW-Vf for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 07:09:59 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-6.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,267,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="465949456" Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com ([171.71.177.238]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 13 Jan 2010 07:09:58 +0000 Received: from stealth-10-32-244-222.cisco.com (stealth-10-32-244-222.cisco.com [10.32.244.222]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o0D791BU021654; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 07:09:56 GMT From: Fred Baker To: 3gv6@ietf.org, int-area@ietf.org, IPv6 Operations In-Reply-To: <1FE1D2FD-FB6D-40D1-9288-B26D9A4B172A@cisco.com> Subject: Re: CFP: IETF/3GPP Workshop on IPv4->IPv6 Coexistence and Transition in 3GPP Networks References: <1FE1D2FD-FB6D-40D1-9288-B26D9A4B172A@cisco.com> Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 23:09:54 -0800 Cc: "Bertenyi, Balazs (NSN - HU/Budapest)" , Jari Arkko , "ext Hietalahti Hannu (Nokia-CIC/Oulu)" , Hui Deng , Maurice Pope X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936) Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Jan 8, 2010, at 1:09 PM, Fred Baker wrote: > Attached is the call for contributions to a workshop on IPv4->IPv6 > Coexistence and Transition. The workshop, hosted by China Mobile, is > planned for 1-2 March 2010 in San Francisco. Venue, travel, and visa > details are being finalized and will be announced when ready. IETF > participants may post internet drafts and then forward the > announcement from the internet draft service to Maurice Pope, as > described in the CFP. We now have registration and etc information for the conference. ftp://ftpeng.cisco.com/fred/3gpp-ietf/Microsoft_Word_-_IETF_Invitation.doc.pdf ftp://ftpeng.cisco.com/fred/3gpp-ietf/Microsoft_Word_-_IPv6_workshop_agenda_v2-1.doc.pdf Recommended hotels include the Hotel Nikko and the Hilton San Francisco, which are across the street from each other. From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Wed Jan 13 00:36:37 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 957593A67D7 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:36:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -64.671 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-64.671 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_SBL=20, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3ctFKuWhiZz7 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:36:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from WPIS-64-140-231-222.worldpath.net (WPIS-64-140-231-222.worldpath.net [64.140.231.222]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A447F3A68E9 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:36:36 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100113083636.A447F3A68E9@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:36:36 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Rabuwq Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Wed Jan 13 00:36:55 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D158F3A6827 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:36:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -64.671 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-64.671 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_SBL=20, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tjDqxVwBoFiu for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:36:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from WPIS-64-140-231-222.worldpath.net (WPIS-64-140-231-222.worldpath.net [64.140.231.222]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 992EE3A67D7 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:36:54 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100113083654.992EE3A67D7@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:36:54 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Obezumy Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Wed Jan 13 00:38:37 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65F133A68F8 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:38:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -62.171 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-62.171 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_SBL=20, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B2mmldhg+m38 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:38:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from WPIS-64-140-231-222.worldpath.net (WPIS-64-140-231-222.worldpath.net [64.140.231.222]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F3BD3A6827 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:38:36 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100113083836.7F3BD3A6827@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:38:36 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Ryfil Corporation.
All rights reserved

From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Wed Jan 13 07:51:04 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AE083A6910 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 07:51:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.549 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.549 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CJ6awvQZxpQp for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 07:51:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3724B3A67A7 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 07:51:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NV5Mf-000Epn-2V for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 15:42:33 +0000 Received: from [171.71.176.117] (helo=sj-iport-6.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NV5Md-000EpO-2f for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 15:42:31 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-6.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,268,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="466164939" Received: from rcdn-core-6.cisco.com ([173.37.93.157]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 13 Jan 2010 15:42:30 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com [72.163.62.200]) by rcdn-core-6.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o0DFgUXa009868; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 15:42:30 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-201.cisco.com ([72.163.62.208]) by xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 13 Jan 2010 09:42:30 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 09:42:29 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20100113102809.00d4ca30@opy.nosense.org> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt thread-index: AcqT5GTfjEVnx/TXQY6O6Iv+eB97FAAgh0OA References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com><8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com><20091219161224.47262294@opy.nosense.org> <20100113102809.00d4ca30@opy.nosense.org> From: "Wes Beebee (wbeebee)" To: "Mark Smith" , "Ole Troan" Cc: "IPv6 Operations" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Jan 2010 15:42:30.0446 (UTC) FILETIME=[041444E0:01CA9467] Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: > I'm generally happy with the above text. I think the last sentence in > (b) would be slightly better if it said "greater than" rather than "different than". Actually, "different than" captures the scenario where the PD is a longer prefix than the hint indicated, in which case the CPE router may not be able to number all of the interfaces in such a way as to enable SLAAC. What to do in this case is unclear, and we leave it up to the vendor. It also captures the case where the PD is a shorter prefix than the hint indicated, which is not really a problem for the CPE router. - Wes From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Wed Jan 13 15:54:36 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A50A03A6804 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 15:54:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id du4IzTMbuJqn for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 15:54:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB9003A682E for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 15:54:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NVCwI-0000uW-EU for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 23:47:50 +0000 Received: from [17.254.13.23] (helo=mail-out4.apple.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NVCwG-0000uC-4R for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 23:47:48 +0000 Received: from relay14.apple.com (relay14.apple.com [17.128.113.52]) by mail-out4.apple.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53CA9864EC83 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 15:47:47 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: 11807134-b7cd9ae000001002-ec-4b4e5ba3203c Received: from il0602a-dhcp117.apple.com (il0602a-dhcp117.apple.com [17.206.23.245]) (using TLS with cipher AES128-SHA (AES128-SHA/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by relay14.apple.com (Apple SCV relay) with SMTP id 0D.EC.04098.3AB5E4B4; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 15:47:47 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt From: james woodyatt In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 15:47:47 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <556F0FA8-8E14-4956-B4E6-9269C9C2BDB4@apple.com> References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <"8BB9490E-B674-4D45-9 71A-3D25AC455B10"@cisco.com> <20091219163604.0bc27ad9@opy.nosense.org> <"0ACAAC 20-3F15-47FA-8E44-9E58BA67CB29"@cisco.com> <"E1829B60731D1740BB7A0626B4FAF0A64 67F04AC66"@XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com> <20100109231828.21da6fd8@opy.nosense.org> <20100110100858.35ddc58e@opy.nosense.org> <20100110211136.48f6bbcb@opy.nosense.org> <20100110214900.5f32df29@opy.nosense.org> To: IPv6 Operations X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAZE= Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Jan 11, 2010, at 10:11, Templin, Fred L wrote: >=20 > James Woodyatt's disclaimer notwithstanding, does anyone see an issue = with using unsolicited, unicast NAs? For prefix redirection? p1. I think this is better deferred to the -bis draft. p2. I don't think it will be practical for CPE routers to send prefix = redirections to other nodes on the WAN link in neighbor advertisements. = I think default routers on the WAN link should send ICMP redirects to = hosts. The validity check on ICMP redirects are a good idea. Even = better idea in the presence of SEND. -- james woodyatt member of technical staff, communications engineering From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Wed Jan 13 18:00:06 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 073C23A68B5 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:00:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.958 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.958 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.641, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Yo5-nIYqyQws for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:00:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EADE73A688C for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 17:59:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NVEqG-000EMB-V4 for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 01:49:44 +0000 Received: from [202.136.110.251] (helo=smtp2.adam.net.au) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NVEqD-000ELl-P2 for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 01:49:42 +0000 Received: from 114-30-101-247.ip.adam.com.au ([114.30.101.247] helo=opy.nosense.org) by smtp2.adam.net.au with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1NVEqA-0006z4-4w; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 12:19:38 +1030 Received: from opy.nosense.org (localhost.localdomain [IPv6:::1]) by opy.nosense.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F9B5492FE; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 12:19:37 +1030 (CST) Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 12:19:37 +1030 From: Mark Smith To: "Wes Beebee (wbeebee)" Cc: "Ole Troan" , "IPv6 Operations" Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Message-ID: <20100114121937.0cfa8d7e@opy.nosense.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219161224.47262294@opy.nosense.org> <20100113102809.00d4ca30@opy.nosense.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.3 (GTK+ 2.18.5; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-Location: Lower Mitcham, South Australia, 5062 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hi Wes, On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 09:42:29 -0600 "Wes Beebee (wbeebee)" wrote: > > I'm generally happy with the above text. I think the last sentence in > > (b) would be slightly better if it said "greater than" rather than > "different than". > > Actually, "different than" captures the scenario where the PD is a > longer prefix than the hint indicated, in which case the CPE router may > not be able to number all of the interfaces in such a way as to enable > SLAAC. What to do in this case is unclear, and we leave it up to the > vendor. I'm not quite sure then I can see the value in this mechanism at all then. I've seen this mechanism as a "Hey ISP, I really need this amount of address space, otherwise I'm in trouble". If it's less significant than that, and the CPE will have to deal with a smaller prefix than requested (how is an interesting issue - interface priorities?), then I'm not sure I can see that much value in what it provides, other than some slightly useful information to the ISP about how many downstream interfaces their customers' CPE has. That might be useful to an ISP for addressing allocation purposes, although I'd think they're being unnecessarily conservative if they're counting how many individual subnets are required downstream of their customers' CPE. Have I completely misunderstood the intent of this request/mechanism? Thanks, Mark. > > It also captures the case where the PD is a shorter prefix than the hint > indicated, which is not really a problem for the CPE router. > > - Wes > > From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Wed Jan 13 19:00:14 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 267713A68C4 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:00:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.230, BAYES_95=3, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_DYNAMIC=1.144, HELO_EQ_TW=1.335, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.552, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id c4Pm++TnzJVG for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:00:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from 123-192-173-145.dynamic.kbronet.com.tw (123-192-173-145.dynamic.kbronet.com.tw [123.192.173.145]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D907C3A681E for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:00:12 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100114030012.D907C3A681E@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:00:12 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 YRAUMA. All rights reserved.
From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Wed Jan 13 19:00:22 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 734B13A6866 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:00:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.499 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.980, BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_DYNAMIC=1.144, HELO_EQ_TW=1.335, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.552, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, NUMERIC_HTTP_ADDR=0.001, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VrLCYez6DBl6 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:00:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from 123-192-173-145.dynamic.kbronet.com.tw (123-192-173-145.dynamic.kbronet.com.tw [123.192.173.145]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 547753A681E for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:00:21 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100114030021.547753A681E@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:00:21 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 ORUXADILYS. All rights reserved.
From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Wed Jan 13 19:00:27 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B5483A6866 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:00:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.499 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.980, BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_DYNAMIC=1.144, HELO_EQ_TW=1.335, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.552, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id snts8vW5BbKQ for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:00:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from 123-192-173-145.dynamic.kbronet.com.tw (123-192-173-145.dynamic.kbronet.com.tw [123.192.173.145]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66EA13A681E for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:00:26 -0800 (PST) From: VIAGRA R Online Shop To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Valued customer v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org 80% OFF on Pfizer. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100114030026.66EA13A681E@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:00:26 -0800 (PST) December 2009
If you cannot see this email,  click here.


Having trouble loading this image. Click to try again
Sign up for other emails.

You are subscribed to this email as v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org, v6ops-archive
You can unsubscribe from this email by updating your preferences.

View our privacy policy.

Copyright c 2009 YOEZIM. All rights reserved.
From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Thu Jan 14 00:34:33 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D81973A688F for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 00:34:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3vLYyn01EDBN for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 00:34:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A85D3A67A6 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 00:34:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NVL3F-0004so-RU for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 08:27:33 +0000 Received: from [171.71.176.117] (helo=sj-iport-6.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NVL3D-0004s7-94 for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 08:27:31 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-6.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,274,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="466608393" Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com ([171.71.177.254]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 14 Jan 2010 08:27:30 +0000 Received: from [10.55.160.155] (ams-otroan-87110.cisco.com [10.55.160.155]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o0E8RRhQ003999; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 08:27:28 GMT Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ole Troan In-Reply-To: <20100114121937.0cfa8d7e@opy.nosense.org> Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 09:26:46 +0100 Cc: "Wes Beebee (wbeebee)" , "IPv6 Operations" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <80BE81EF-E20B-49E0-97BA-CEC4014B2982@cisco.com> References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <8BB9490E-B674-4D45-971A-3D25AC455B10@cisco.com> <20091219161224.47262294@opy.nosense.org> <20100113102809.00d4ca30@opy.nosense.org> <20100114121937.0cfa8d7e@opy.nosense.org> To: Mark Smith X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Mark, >>> I'm generally happy with the above text. I think the last sentence = in >>> (b) would be slightly better if it said "greater than" rather than >> "different than". >>=20 >> Actually, "different than" captures the scenario where the PD is a >> longer prefix than the hint indicated, in which case the CPE router = may >> not be able to number all of the interfaces in such a way as to = enable >> SLAAC. What to do in this case is unclear, and we leave it up to the >> vendor. >=20 > I'm not quite sure then I can see the value in this mechanism at all > then. I've seen this mechanism as a "Hey ISP, I really need this = amount > of address space, otherwise I'm in trouble". If it's less > significant than that, and the CPE will have to deal with a smaller > prefix than requested (how is an interesting issue - interface > priorities?), then I'm not sure I can see that much value in what it > provides, other than some slightly useful information to the ISP about > how many downstream interfaces their customers' CPE has. That might be > useful to an ISP for addressing allocation purposes, although I'd = think > they're being unnecessarily conservative if they're counting how many > individual subnets are required downstream of their customers' CPE. >=20 > Have I completely misunderstood the intent of this request/mechanism? it is a "MAY" and a "hint". a typical scenario would for example be that an SP gave a /56 regardless = of the hint. does the working group feel a need to specify the case where the CE = router doesn't get a large enough prefix delegated? or are we happy = leaving that up to implementations. alternatives are at least "various = degrees of bailing out", "NAT66", "proxy ND"... Best regards, Ole= From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Thu Jan 14 02:11:08 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8E773A692E for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 02:11:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kCUBj3udyaX0 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 02:11:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64C193A6914 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 02:11:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NVMZe-000HlC-DM for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 10:05:06 +0000 Received: from [2002:d9a0:db4b:1::9] (helo=p15139323.pureserver.info) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NVMZb-000HkJ-5S for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 10:05:03 +0000 Received: from ip-217-18-180-147.static.reverse.dsi.net ([217.18.180.147] helo=[192.168.73.35]) by p15139323.pureserver.info with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NVMZZ-0003vI-6a for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 11:05:01 +0100 From: Konrad Rosenbaum To: "IPv6 Operations" Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 11:04:44 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <20100114121937.0cfa8d7e@opy.nosense.org> <80BE81EF-E20B-49E0-97BA-CEC4014B2982@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <80BE81EF-E20B-49E0-97BA-CEC4014B2982@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart10620979.HU1PhgbyD7"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201001141104.49701.konrad@silmor.de> Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --nextPart10620979.HU1PhgbyD7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Thursday 14 January 2010 09:26:46 Ole Troan wrote: > it is a "MAY" and a "hint". > a typical scenario would for example be that an SP gave a /56 regardless = of > the hint. I hope /48 is more typical... ;-) > does the working group feel a need to specify the case where the CE router > doesn't get a large enough prefix delegated? or are we happy leaving that > up to implementations. alternatives are at least "various degrees of > bailing out", "NAT66", "proxy ND"... I personally feel this should be specified. Or at the very least some=20 acceptable options should be listed. Bailing out: does this mean fe80::/10 only? Or fc00::/7 ? Note: fe80::/10 is a major headache for users - I don't think I can explai= n=20 to most of my friends how to enter http://[fe80::1122:33ff:fe44:5566%1] int= o=20 their browsers and why it is different for every CPE they use. NAT66: first off, the draft expired. Second it does not solve the problem: = it=20 is not a cone NAT - it translates a /48 into another /48 (it might be adapt= ed=20 to translate /n into /n, but not into a cone NAT). What do you mean with "proxy ND"? =46or most users a web proxy might be a temporary solution to deal with a n= o=20 delegation situation. Question aside from this: why request only a prefix that is barely big enou= gh=20 for a /64 for each interface? There could be dozens of routers behind that= =20 CPE. Why not encourage to request a /48 everytime? We aren't running out of= =20 them any time soon. Konrad --nextPart10620979.HU1PhgbyD7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAktO7DwACgkQyxXJkXI6YgDHSACgl8oONcVjPJUxsL1PU/3EEsoU 0rwAoIhy+w+r4lClhwh74NwpSCl1qGFZ =gNC/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart10620979.HU1PhgbyD7-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Thu Jan 14 02:49:58 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 759223A68D4 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 02:49:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wGuc6CCvicrT for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 02:49:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A205A3A68FF for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 02:49:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NVN9S-000Mhq-73 for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 10:42:06 +0000 Received: from [171.71.176.70] (helo=sj-iport-1.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NVN9O-000Mgr-C3 for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 10:42:02 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAD6ETkurR7Hu/2dsb2JhbADBUZR+hDAE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,274,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="288209041" Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com ([171.71.177.238]) by sj-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 14 Jan 2010 10:41:57 +0000 Received: from [10.55.160.155] (ams-otroan-87110.cisco.com [10.55.160.155]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o0EAfudR021636; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 10:41:56 GMT Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ole Troan In-Reply-To: <201001141104.49701.konrad@silmor.de> Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 11:41:10 +0100 Cc: "IPv6 Operations" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <1749C377-DA54-474E-BC88-0D5E2D1C3671@cisco.com> References: <20091218104501.538103A6782@core3.amsl.com> <20100114121937.0cfa8d7e@opy.nosense.org> <80BE81EF-E20B-49E0-97BA-CEC4014B2982@cisco.com> <201001141104.49701.konrad@silmor.de> To: Konrad Rosenbaum X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Konrad, >> it is a "MAY" and a "hint". >> a typical scenario would for example be that an SP gave a /56 = regardless of >> the hint. >=20 > I hope /48 is more typical... ;-) sure, that's up to the RIRs and SP policy. >> does the working group feel a need to specify the case where the CE = router >> doesn't get a large enough prefix delegated? or are we happy leaving = that >> up to implementations. alternatives are at least "various degrees of >> bailing out", "NAT66", "proxy ND"... >=20 > I personally feel this should be specified. Or at the very least some=20= > acceptable options should be listed. >=20 > Bailing out: does this mean fe80::/10 only? Or fc00::/7 ? > Note: fe80::/10 is a major headache for users - I don't think I can = explain=20 > to most of my friends how to enter = http://[fe80::1122:33ff:fe44:5566%1] into=20 > their browsers and why it is different for every CPE they use. >=20 > NAT66: first off, the draft expired. Second it does not solve the = problem: it=20 > is not a cone NAT - it translates a /48 into another /48 (it might be = adapted=20 > to translate /n into /n, but not into a cone NAT). >=20 > What do you mean with "proxy ND"? >=20 > For most users a web proxy might be a temporary solution to deal with = a no=20 > delegation situation. I added the other options partly tongue in cheek. the form of bailing = out I had in mind was to not enable IPv6 on interfaces which the CE = doesn't have addresses for. and raise the alarm. > Question aside from this: why request only a prefix that is barely big = enough=20 > for a /64 for each interface? There could be dozens of routers behind = that=20 > CPE. Why not encourage to request a /48 everytime? We aren't running = out of=20 > them any time soon. it is not quite a request. it is just a hint. as such another good = option is to remove the text about the hint altogether from this draft. Best regards, Ole From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Thu Jan 14 03:44:16 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40EAF3A67B3 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 03:44:16 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uJg4BeZxyitx for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 03:44:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83CDA3A63EC for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 03:44:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NVO0u-0004QC-DW for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 11:37:20 +0000 Received: from [171.71.176.117] (helo=sj-iport-6.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NVO0q-0004P8-J5 for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 11:37:16 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-6.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,274,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="466681659" Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com ([171.71.177.237]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 14 Jan 2010 11:37:16 +0000 Received: from [10.55.160.155] (ams-otroan-87110.cisco.com [10.55.160.155]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o0EBbDMl011478; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 11:37:14 GMT Subject: Re: CPE router learning DNS servers - comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ole Troan In-Reply-To: <02ba01ca92f6$ab1c5010$c5f0200a@cisco.com> Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 12:36:26 +0100 Cc: "'STARK, BARBARA H \(ATTLABS\)'" , , Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <534AD028-BE0B-4AF8-B25D-F0AC797F8228@cisco.com> References: <119f01ca909e$7e489940$c5f0200a@cisco.com> <7582BC68E4994F4ABF0BD4723975C3FA11985F45@crexc41p> <02ba01ca92f6$ab1c5010$c5f0200a@cisco.com> To: Dan Wing X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Dan, to make sure this has been answered. >> The L-6 requirement is a LAN-side (DHCPv6 Server)=20 >> requirement. >=20 > You're right; my misread. >=20 >> However, since SLAAC is the expected method for address config in=20 >> the LAN, and support for DHCPv6 DNS_SERVERS option is a MUST (and=20 >> other options is a SHOULD), I think that the MAY statement for=20 >> stateless DHCPv6 support might not be completely consistent. >=20 > Agreed - we certainly need a way for the hosts to learn their > IPv6 DNS servers. And it should agree with RFC4339 and RFC5505 > (neither of which are cited by draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03). these changes should hopefully clear the inconsistency: L-10: The IPv6 CE router MUST support a DHCPv6 server capable of IPv6 address assignment according to [RFC3315] OR a stateless DHCPv6 server according to [RFC3736] on its LAN interfaces. L-12: The IPv6 CE router MUST support providing DNS information in the DHCPv6 DNS_SERVERS option [RFC3646]. with regards to RFC4339, I consider that historic at this point. as for RFC5505 I see that more as guidelines for protocol developers. we = are trying hard to invent nothing in this draft, so I'm not sure it is = relevant to cite 5505 either. >> As for the WAN-side (DHCPv6 client), there's currently no mention of >> stateless DHCPv6. It does seem implied by other requirements that >> describe support for SLAAC + the ability to get other config info via >> DHCPv6. It might be good to be more explicit on this. since we have a MUST on a stateful DHCP exchange on the WAN interface I = don't see the purpose of mentioning the so-called stateless variant. cheers, Ole From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Thu Jan 14 08:57:36 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D07C3A6405 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 08:57:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jF6Z4WbMlhaY for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 08:57:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DE963A63D3 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 08:57:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NVSsw-000GRi-57 for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 16:49:26 +0000 Received: from [171.68.10.86] (helo=sj-iport-4.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NVSsG-000GK4-EB for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 16:48:45 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-4.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,275,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="74391944" Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com ([171.71.177.237]) by sj-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 14 Jan 2010 16:48:43 +0000 Received: from dwingwxp01 ([10.32.240.198]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o0EGmhbh017966; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 16:48:43 GMT From: "Dan Wing" To: "'Ole Troan'" Cc: "'STARK, BARBARA H \(ATTLABS\)'" , , References: <119f01ca909e$7e489940$c5f0200a@cisco.com> <7582BC68E4994F4ABF0BD4723975C3FA11985F45@crexc41p> <02ba01ca92f6$ab1c5010$c5f0200a@cisco.com> <534AD028-BE0B-4AF8-B25D-F0AC797F8228@cisco.com> Subject: RE: CPE router learning DNS servers - comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03 Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 08:48:43 -0800 Message-ID: <026401ca9539$6ea51eb0$06636b80@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350 In-Reply-To: <534AD028-BE0B-4AF8-B25D-F0AC797F8228@cisco.com> Thread-Index: AcqVDev/JCOtG5xhStKFBTIrlNS1mAAK4FQQ Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Thanks! -d > -----Original Message----- > From: Ole Troan [mailto:ot@cisco.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 3:36 AM > To: Dan Wing > Cc: 'STARK, BARBARA H (ATTLABS)'; > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router@tools.ietf.org; v6ops@ops.ietf.org > Subject: Re: CPE router learning DNS servers - comment on > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03 > > Dan, > > to make sure this has been answered. > > >> The L-6 requirement is a LAN-side (DHCPv6 Server) > >> requirement. > > > > You're right; my misread. > > > >> However, since SLAAC is the expected method for address config in > >> the LAN, and support for DHCPv6 DNS_SERVERS option is a MUST (and > >> other options is a SHOULD), I think that the MAY statement for > >> stateless DHCPv6 support might not be completely consistent. > > > > Agreed - we certainly need a way for the hosts to learn their > > IPv6 DNS servers. And it should agree with RFC4339 and RFC5505 > > (neither of which are cited by draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03). > > these changes should hopefully clear the inconsistency: > > L-10: The IPv6 CE router MUST support a DHCPv6 server capable of > IPv6 address assignment according to [RFC3315] OR a > stateless > DHCPv6 server according to [RFC3736] on its LAN interfaces. > > L-12: The IPv6 CE router MUST support providing DNS information in > the DHCPv6 DNS_SERVERS option [RFC3646]. > > > with regards to RFC4339, I consider that historic at this point. > as for RFC5505 I see that more as guidelines for protocol > developers. we are trying hard to invent nothing in this > draft, so I'm not sure it is relevant to cite 5505 either. > > >> As for the WAN-side (DHCPv6 client), there's currently no > mention of > >> stateless DHCPv6. It does seem implied by other requirements that > >> describe support for SLAAC + the ability to get other > config info via > >> DHCPv6. It might be good to be more explicit on this. > > since we have a MUST on a stateful DHCP exchange on the WAN > interface I don't see the purpose of mentioning the > so-called stateless variant. > > cheers, > Ole > From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Thu Jan 14 15:13:12 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B28083A6A08 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:13:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -38.989 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-38.989 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_EQ_BR=0.955, HOST_EQ_BR=1.295, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9ekq3mzLHAbU for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:13:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from bhe201062187017.res-com.wayinternet.com.br (bhe201062187017.res-com.wayinternet.com.br [201.62.187.17]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FF7A3A69ED for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:13:08 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100114231311.5FF7A3A69ED@core3.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:13:08 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Jnecjvjwialy Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Thu Jan 14 15:13:43 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 626A83A6890 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:13:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -38.989 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-38.989 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_EQ_BR=0.955, HOST_EQ_BR=1.295, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DcWUbK9QNErU for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:13:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from bhe201062187017.res-com.wayinternet.com.br (bhe201062187017.res-com.wayinternet.com.br [201.62.187.17]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB3583A6A08 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:13:35 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100114231339.AB3583A6A08@core3.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:13:35 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Arjwypjzq Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Thu Jan 14 15:14:53 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FB383A6890 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:14:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -38.989 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-38.989 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_EQ_BR=0.955, HOST_EQ_BR=1.295, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ga3ewPwPHORk for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:14:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from bhe201062187017.res-com.wayinternet.com.br (bhe201062187017.res-com.wayinternet.com.br [201.62.187.17]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF8823A680C for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:14:48 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100114231451.EF8823A680C@core3.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:14:48 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Ezivyripjcqr Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Fri Jan 15 18:05:17 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F00C23A6867 for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 18:05:17 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 18:05:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from alston.com (unknown [122.3.15.16]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 08B2B3A6405 for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 18:05:07 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: You have a new personal message To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100116020510.08B2B3A6405@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 18:05:07 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 38884 Inc. All rights reserved.

From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Sat Jan 16 00:08:48 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DC663A6767 for ; Sat, 16 Jan 2010 00:08:48 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Sat, 16 Jan 2010 00:08:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from ahcnm.org (unknown [58.68.8.190]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 2488C3A688E for ; Sat, 16 Jan 2010 00:08:34 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: Deal of the Day To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100116080836.2488C3A688E@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2010 00:08:34 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 89141 Inc. All rights reserved.

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Sat Jan 16 10:55:54 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B47E43A6A02 for ; Sat, 16 Jan 2010 10:55:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -66.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-66.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_60=1, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_BLACK=20, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xRVE5Y0v+vZQ for ; Sat, 16 Jan 2010 10:55:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from pool-2098.adsl.interware.hu (pool-2098.adsl.interware.hu [213.178.108.50]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E24253A69FF for ; Sat, 16 Jan 2010 10:55:53 -0800 (PST) From: Anastasya To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Finally I found you on the computer, my good! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100116185553.E24253A69FF@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2010 10:55:53 -0800 (PST) Hey, why do not you write? You forgot about me?
"I am very unhappy without you, remember me?" It's me, Olga from Russia, Moscow, remember?
I'm waiting for you on his page on the Internet, and miss you terribly!

Click here
From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Sat Jan 16 10:56:53 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E4693A68FC for ; Sat, 16 Jan 2010 10:56:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -69.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-69.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_BLACK=20, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WcCeDOUgSYuf for ; Sat, 16 Jan 2010 10:56:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from pool-2098.adsl.interware.hu (pool-2098.adsl.interware.hu [213.178.108.50]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8944F3A67F2 for ; Sat, 16 Jan 2010 10:56:50 -0800 (PST) From: Ksenya To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Hello MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100116185652.8944F3A67F2@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2010 10:56:50 -0800 (PST) Good day, I accidentally found a letter from you, I remember how we communicated with you.
You were so hot, let's talk again - drop me to the page - I'll wait for my very sweet!
Click here
From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Sat Jan 16 10:58:05 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35E2A3A68FC for ; Sat, 16 Jan 2010 10:58:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -66.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-66.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_60=1, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_BLACK=20, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L-bZuLPzOslu for ; Sat, 16 Jan 2010 10:58:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from pool-2098.adsl.interware.hu (pool-2098.adsl.interware.hu [213.178.108.50]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B3AD3A67F2 for ; Sat, 16 Jan 2010 10:58:04 -0800 (PST) From: Olya To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Sweet Lord, call me on my cell! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100116185804.5B3AD3A67F2@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2010 10:58:04 -0800 (PST) Hey, why do not you write? You forgot about me?
"I am very unhappy without you, remember me?" It's me, Olga from Russia, Moscow, remember?
I'm waiting for you on his page on the Internet, and miss you terribly!

Click here
From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Sat Jan 16 22:22:34 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E9703A68D1 for ; Sat, 16 Jan 2010 22:22:33 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Sat, 16 Jan 2010 22:22:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from af.pentagon.mil (unknown [217.53.8.91]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 4C8F33A67B2 for ; Sat, 16 Jan 2010 22:22:11 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: Missed the Final Specials? To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100117062215.4C8F33A67B2@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2010 22:22:11 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 50574 Inc. All rights reserved.

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Sun Jan 17 05:14:49 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 145683A6A06 for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 05:14:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -67.525 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-67.525 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_80=2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URIBL_BLACK=20, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BPmuac95sFeB for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 05:14:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from seated-flusher.volia.net (seated-flusher.volia.net [93.73.254.216]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9FF33A6452 for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 05:14:47 -0800 (PST) From: Olga To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: I'll still love you, come to me, I'm in a hotel! Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100117131447.A9FF33A6452@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 05:14:47 -0800 (PST) Hi, I am sad and dreary one - there - In Moscow,
I live alone now hooked up the internet, that's looking for someone to talk to,
I have a web camera as well as personal page on the internet, come on,
help me to remove my sadness.

Click here From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Sun Jan 17 05:14:55 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3034B3A6A06 for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 05:14:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -67.525 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-67.525 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_80=2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URIBL_BLACK=20, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cITC7ufEntVB for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 05:14:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from seated-flusher.volia.net (seated-flusher.volia.net [93.73.254.216]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70C7C3A6452 for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 05:14:54 -0800 (PST) From: Olga To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: We talked for a long time, and you went and said goodbye! Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100117131454.70C7C3A6452@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 05:14:54 -0800 (PST) Hi, I am sad and dreary one - there - In Moscow,
I live alone now hooked up the internet, that's looking for someone to talk to,
I have a web camera as well as personal page on the internet, come on,
help me to remove my sadness.

Click here From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Sun Jan 17 05:15:00 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE4CA3A6A06 for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 05:15:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -67.525 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-67.525 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_80=2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URIBL_BLACK=20, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UprJ2401guSO for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 05:15:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from seated-flusher.volia.net (seated-flusher.volia.net [93.73.254.216]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 079473A6452 for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 05:14:59 -0800 (PST) From: Olga To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: do you remember how we communicated with you Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100117131500.079473A6452@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 05:14:59 -0800 (PST) Hi, I am sad and dreary one - there - In Moscow,
I live alone now hooked up the internet, that's looking for someone to talk to,
I have a web camera as well as personal page on the internet, come on,
help me to remove my sadness.

Click here From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Sun Jan 17 06:37:56 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E3ED3A6806 for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 06:37:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wXPThc+Fz7SJ for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 06:37:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0D0C3A63EC for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 06:37:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NWW7E-0005WW-PE for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 14:28:32 +0000 Received: from [2002:d9a0:db4b:1::9] (helo=p15139323.pureserver.info) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NWW7C-0005W4-9o for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 14:28:30 +0000 Received: from p5ddaa762.dip.t-dialin.net ([93.218.167.98] helo=zaphod.lan.local) by p15139323.pureserver.info with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NWW78-0005eF-MN for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 15:28:26 +0100 From: Konrad Rosenbaum To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org Subject: "minor" CPE detail: DHCP on WAN Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 15:28:17 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1837815.7s2QTMePSv"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201001171528.23974@zaphod.konrad.silmor.de> Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --nextPart1837815.7s2QTMePSv Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Hi, I'm currently trying to make my own routers CPE spec conformant. Is anybody= =20 aware of a DHCP implementation that: *is open source *runs on Linux (preferably prepackaged with Debian) *can operate on PPP(oE) links *can operate on plain Ethernet *can do IA_NA and IA_PD *can do reconfiguration (receive and act on Reconfigure packets) *can call scripts (to reconfigue SLAAC) In short: do I have any chance of supporting the CPE router spec with Linux= =20 without implementing the WAN DHCP client myself? Konrad --nextPart1837815.7s2QTMePSv Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAktTHoIACgkQyxXJkXI6YgDCBQCbBT93dfqZ0/CatcknWDaB24TE CxsAnR+70aAdfQKT+8uzfIz0jzTLVG+K =dyvg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1837815.7s2QTMePSv-- From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Sun Jan 17 08:41:46 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5825B3A6959 for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 08:41:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.326 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.326 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HOST_EQ_STATIC=1.172, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RATWARE_MS_HASH=1.398, RATWARE_OUTLOOK_NONAME=2.171, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OR6IRSYYuhE2 for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 08:41:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from 77-239-190-120.static.vega-ua.net (77-239-190-120.static.vega-ua.net [77.239.190.120]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id EC05B3A68F8 for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 08:41:44 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [27.0.20.4] X-Originating-Email: [v6ops-archive@ietf.org] X-Sender: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Message-Id: <1e0b01ca97a4$b24aaeb0$78beef4d@x-bbcc83eb93e94> From: Doctor Forest To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Best Sales 2010! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 08:41:44 -0800 (PST) Welcome to WebMD
Welcome to WebMD
17.1.2010
New from WebMD: Dear v6ops-archive@ietf.org Sign-up today!

You are subscribed as matlab@mit.edu.
View and manage your WebMD newsletter preferences.
Subscribe to more newsletters. Change/update your email address.

WebMD Privacy Policy
WebMD Office of Privacy
1175 Peachtree Street, Suite 2400, Atlanta, GA 30361
2010 WebMD, LLC. All rights reserved.
From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Sun Jan 17 12:25:16 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49D2B3A67F6 for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 12:25:16 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -67.081 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-67.081 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_80=2, HELO_EQ_CZ=0.445, HOST_EQ_CZ=0.904, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URIBL_BLACK=20, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TJ1PfEHeSplU for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 12:25:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from r9dn92.net.upc.cz (r9dn92.net.upc.cz [78.102.117.92]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 012E73A672E for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 12:25:14 -0800 (PST) From: Tanya To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: How about..... :-) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100117202515.012E73A672E@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 12:25:14 -0800 (PST) Hey, why do not you write? You forgot about me?
"I am very unhappy without you, remember me?" It's me, Olga from Russia, Moscow, remember?
I'm waiting for you on his page on the Internet, and miss you terribly!

Click here
From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Sun Jan 17 12:27:26 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B54AC3A67DB for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 12:27:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -66.081 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-66.081 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_95=3, HELO_EQ_CZ=0.445, HOST_EQ_CZ=0.904, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URIBL_BLACK=20, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nfQkJx4359Bx for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 12:27:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from r9dn92.net.upc.cz (r9dn92.net.upc.cz [78.102.117.92]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 711DF3A672E for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 12:27:25 -0800 (PST) From: Alexandra To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: We talked for a long time, and you went and said goodbye! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100117202725.711DF3A672E@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 12:27:25 -0800 (PST) Hi, I'm from Russia - a dream to live abroad, my name is Mary, can we get started?
"I'm on this dating site - come in to me.

Click here
From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Sun Jan 17 12:28:58 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F2B43A68A3 for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 12:28:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -54.948 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-54.948 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_80=2, FH_HELO_ALMOST_IP=5.417, FH_HOST_ALMOST_IP=1.889, HELO_DYNAMIC_SPLIT_IP=3.493, HOST_EQ_STATIC=1.172, HOST_EQ_STATICIP=1.511, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URIBL_BLACK=20, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pyJyrFQwtfIP for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 12:28:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from r9dn92.net.upc.cz (r9dn92.net.upc.cz [78.102.117.92]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB7B93A67DB for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 12:28:57 -0800 (PST) From: Jenya To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Finally I found you on the computer, my good! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100117202857.EB7B93A67DB@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 12:28:57 -0800 (PST) Hello dear, do you remember how we communicated with you?
Long ago you could not see, I am Marina - with Russia, do you remember me?
"Come to my page - let's talk, I'm waiting!
Click here
From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 18 08:08:44 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A245C3A67E3 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 08:08:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -108.499 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-108.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.900, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 52dnWnjixlxP for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 08:08:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB9503A6407 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 08:08:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NWu1j-000PaY-MA for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 16:00:27 +0000 Received: from [171.71.176.117] (helo=sj-iport-6.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NWu1e-000PaB-Uo for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 16:00:24 +0000 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-6.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEABwUVEurRN+J/2dsb2JhbADCEJQGhDME X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,297,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="468743819" Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.223.137]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 Jan 2010 16:00:12 +0000 Received: from stealth-10-32-244-219.cisco.com (stealth-10-32-244-219.cisco.com [10.32.244.219]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o0IG0B7o010101; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 16:00:11 GMT Message-Id: <1F22A806-8341-4FB0-8135-3518574C7661@cisco.com> From: Fred Baker To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Subject: draft-ietf-v6ops-v6inixp-04.txt WGLC Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 08:00:11 -0800 Cc: kurtis@kurtis.pp.se, rbonica@juniper.net X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936) Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: This is to initiate a two week working group last call of draft-ietf- v6ops-v6inixp-04.txt. Please read it now. If you find nits (spelling errors, minor suggested wording changes, etc), comment to the authors; if you find greater issues, such as disagreeing with a statement or finding additional issues that need to be addressed, please post your comments to the list. We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the document as well as its content. If you have read the document and believe it to be of operational utility, that is also an important comment to make. From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 18 14:07:37 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0DFE3A67B7 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 14:07:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.091 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.091 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.508, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7X6cLmmfV+Mv for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 14:07:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A3933A677C for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 14:07:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NWzf6-000GII-Al for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 22:01:28 +0000 Received: from [202.136.110.249] (helo=smtp3.adam.net.au) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NWzf3-000GHb-Fe for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 22:01:25 +0000 Received: from 114-30-100-205.ip.adam.com.au ([114.30.100.205] helo=opy.nosense.org) by smtp3.adam.net.au with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1NWzeh-0007eJ-A8; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 08:31:03 +1030 Received: from opy.nosense.org (localhost.localdomain [IPv6:::1]) by opy.nosense.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63ECB49300; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 08:30:57 +1030 (CST) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 08:30:56 +1030 From: Mark Smith To: Fred Baker Cc: v6ops@ops.ietf.org, kurtis@kurtis.pp.se, rbonica@juniper.net Subject: Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-v6inixp-04.txt WGLC Message-ID: <20100119083056.77d07856@opy.nosense.org> In-Reply-To: <1F22A806-8341-4FB0-8135-3518574C7661@cisco.com> References: <1F22A806-8341-4FB0-8135-3518574C7661@cisco.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.3 (GTK+ 2.18.5; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-Location: Lower Mitcham, South Australia, 5062 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hi, On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 08:00:11 -0800 Fred Baker wrote: > This is to initiate a two week working group last call of draft-ietf- > v6ops-v6inixp-04.txt. Please read it now. If you find nits (spelling > errors, minor suggested wording changes, etc), comment to the authors; > if you find greater issues, such as disagreeing with a statement or > finding additional issues that need to be addressed, please post your > comments to the list. > I think this text needs to be changed in Section 3, Addressing Plan. "IXPs will normally use manual address configuration. Address prefix between /64 and /127 are technically feasible [RFC4291]." RFC4291 says " For all unicast addresses, except those that start with the binary value 000, Interface IDs are required to be 64 bits long and to be constructed in Modified EUI-64 format." If people wish to use longer than /64s, that is up to them. However I think that the text in this draft implies, by referring to RFC4291 the way it does, that this is supported in the IPv6 Addressing Archtecture. I'd suggest something like the following: "IXPs will normally use manual address configuration. The IPv6 ADdressing Architecture [RFC4291] requires that interface identifiers are 64 bits in size for prefixes starting with binary 000, resulting in a maximum prefix length of /64. Longer prefix lengths up to /127 have been used operationally. If prefix lengths longer than 64 bits are chosen, the implications described in [RFC3627] need to be considered." > We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the > document as well as its content. If you have read the document and > believe it to be of operational utility, that is also an important > comment to make. > I think it is a good document. Anything that helps people avoid duplicating the effort of working out how to deploy IPv6 is important. From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 18 14:10:40 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEC643A681B for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 14:10:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aDmeAFNXwT1M for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 14:10:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33B473A677C for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 14:10:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NWzlc-000GyP-My for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 22:08:12 +0000 Received: from [91.194.68.1] (helo=chilli.nosignal.org) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NWzlZ-000Gxq-II for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 22:08:09 +0000 Received: from [78.33.75.33] (helo=[10.1.1.2]) by chilli.nosignal.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NWzlT-0000ke-Ot for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 22:08:05 +0000 From: Andy Davidson Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-8--70042814 Subject: Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-v6inixp-04.txt WGLC Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 22:08:02 +0000 In-Reply-To: <1F22A806-8341-4FB0-8135-3518574C7661@cisco.com> To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org References: <1F22A806-8341-4FB0-8135-3518574C7661@cisco.com> Message-Id: <308E2D25-1AEC-4B90-8FC3-6BCFFFA9DCDC@nosignal.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --Apple-Mail-8--70042814 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On 18 Jan 2010, at 16:00, Fred Baker wrote: > This is to initiate a two week working group last call of = draft-ietf-v6ops-v6inixp-04.txt. Please read it now. If you find nits = (spelling errors, minor suggested wording changes, etc), comment to the = authors; if you find greater issues, such as disagreeing with a = statement or finding additional issues that need to be addressed, please = post your comments to the list. >=20 > We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the = document as well as its content. If you have read the document and = believe it to be of operational utility, that is also an important = comment to make. I think it will be interesting to folk building IXPs, sure let's do work = on this document. 3 - Addressing Plans - part 2 - the author may like to describe that = 32-bit ASN will require spanning across multiple biglets in the ipv6 = address - the example possibly suggests that the ASN encoding will = neatly fit into one portion of the address, and this is not true. 6 - Route servers - md5 should be considered - I think this advice = should be taken out, as this recommendation is not generally accepted, = and the functioning/configuration of a route-server is well outside the = scope of this document. 6 - Route servers - we may like to publish some information on v6 = filtering to promote good hygiene between route-server peers. Missing - link local address recommendations - Right now on an IXP = operational mailing list, some folk are making observations about link = local addressing used by IXP participants, and a recommendation may = follow. It may be sensible to explicitly forbid traffic for link local = protocols other than ND. I am pleased to see the reference to ra-guard, as an operator of l2 = services I am looking forward to being able to roll this out to all of = my ports facing ixp participants and LAN access users ! Andy --Apple-Mail-8--70042814 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
This = is to initiate a two week working group last call of = draft-ietf-v6ops-v6inixp-04.txt. Please read it now. If you find nits = (spelling errors, minor suggested wording changes, etc), comment to the = authors; if you find greater issues, such as disagreeing with a = statement or finding additional issues that need to be addressed, please = post your comments to the list.

We are looking specifically for = comments on the importance of the document as well as its content. If = you have read the document and believe it to be of operational utility, = that is also an important comment to make.

I = think it will be interesting to folk building IXPs, sure let's do work = on this document.

3 - Addressing Plans - part 2 = - the author may like to describe that 32-bit ASN will require spanning = across multiple biglets in the ipv6 address - the example possibly = suggests that the ASN encoding will neatly fit into one portion of the = address, and this is not true.

6 - Route = servers - md5 should be considered - I think this advice should be taken = out, as this recommendation is not generally accepted, and the = functioning/configuration of a route-server is well outside the scope of = this document.

6 - Route servers - we may like = to publish some information on v6 filtering to promote good hygiene = between route-server peers.

Missing - link = local address recommendations - Right now on an IXP operational mailing = list, some folk are making observations about link local addressing used = by IXP participants, and a recommendation may follow.  It may be = sensible to explicitly forbid traffic for link local protocols other = than ND.

I am pleased to see the reference to = ra-guard, as an operator of l2 services I am looking forward to being = able to roll this out to all of my ports facing ixp participants and LAN = access users = !

Andy

= --Apple-Mail-8--70042814-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 19 01:36:36 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 093A63A6978 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 01:36:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.381 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.381 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=3.218, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5p3VHMoS1JP6 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 01:36:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FE503A68E1 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 01:36:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NXAP2-00060z-KI for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 09:29:36 +0000 Received: from [2001:13c7:7001:4000::3] (helo=mail.lacnic.net.uy) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NXAN0-0005jh-Be for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 09:27:30 +0000 Received: from 85-7-200.lacnic.net.uy (unknown [200.7.85.78]) by mail.lacnic.net.uy (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DB973084E8; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 07:27:18 -0200 (UYST) Subject: Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-v6inixp-04.txt WGLC Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Roque Gagliano In-Reply-To: <20100119083056.77d07856@opy.nosense.org> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:28:41 +0100 Cc: Fred Baker , v6ops@ops.ietf.org, kurtis@kurtis.pp.se, rbonica@juniper.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: References: <1F22A806-8341-4FB0-8135-3518574C7661@cisco.com> <20100119083056.77d07856@opy.nosense.org> To: Mark Smith X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) X-LACNIC.uy-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-LACNIC.uy-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-LACNIC.uy-MailScanner-SpamCheck: X-LACNIC.uy-MailScanner-From: roque@lacnic.net Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hi Mark, This text when to several revision, I like the text you are proposing. Roque On Jan 18, 2010, at 11:00 PM, Mark Smith wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 08:00:11 -0800 > Fred Baker wrote: > >> This is to initiate a two week working group last call of draft-ietf- >> v6ops-v6inixp-04.txt. Please read it now. If you find nits (spelling >> errors, minor suggested wording changes, etc), comment to the authors; >> if you find greater issues, such as disagreeing with a statement or >> finding additional issues that need to be addressed, please post your >> comments to the list. >> > > I think this text needs to be changed in Section 3, Addressing Plan. > > "IXPs will normally use manual address configuration. Address prefix > between /64 and /127 are technically feasible [RFC4291]." > > RFC4291 says > > " For all unicast addresses, except those that start with the binary > value 000, Interface IDs are required to be 64 bits long and to be > constructed in Modified EUI-64 format." > > If people wish to use longer than /64s, that is up to them. However I > think that the text in this draft implies, by referring to RFC4291 the > way it does, that this is supported in the IPv6 Addressing Archtecture. > I'd suggest something like the following: > > "IXPs will normally use manual address configuration. The IPv6 > ADdressing Architecture [RFC4291] requires that interface identifiers > are 64 bits in size for prefixes starting with binary 000, resulting in > a maximum prefix length of /64. Longer prefix lengths up to /127 have > been used operationally. If prefix lengths longer than 64 bits are > chosen, the implications described in [RFC3627] need to be considered." > > >> We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the >> document as well as its content. If you have read the document and >> believe it to be of operational utility, that is also an important >> comment to make. >> > > I think it is a good document. Anything that helps people avoid > duplicating the effort of working out how to deploy IPv6 is important. From secmech-request@lists.ietf.org Tue Jan 19 04:16:45 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33F523A683F for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 04:16:45 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 04:16:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from adt.com (unknown [59.164.8.36]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 383E03A686C for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 04:16:35 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: Special Discount 74% for v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100119121641.383E03A686C@core3.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 04:16:35 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 02698 Inc. All rights reserved.

From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 19 10:10:55 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 222703A684D for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:10:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.419 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.419 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.180, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YslGgyzR3X3B for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:10:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A2E03A6782 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:10:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NXIOL-000B49-Cq for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:01:25 +0000 Received: from [209.85.211.132] (helo=mail-yw0-f132.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NXIOH-000B30-AG for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:01:21 +0000 Received: by ywh38 with SMTP id 38so181336ywh.9 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:01:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:x-enigmail-version:openpgp :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=KGDdvEP2rdNCXJDDxK294geDq0mUjfcBGLQG3Jwuwi4=; b=UdArmn2n5Atk085c+2oUPNKsjUB/uLDdZauFocatW44FTHB1NSrBwiSs87gSvIT0+d alyIi4oHC1y7RnxTAFvrPWT23C3A2diB6dmD6cVwwZcFp91x8LxGAX6zxbjjAlfSGo0f 29w95oQOkGHapt/Imaeld5TROY7dS2CCwxuwg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :x-enigmail-version:openpgp:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=c4khuhGeQ0T+MSmbGTLqbiTvkmD/2P2Mx34Ynkx/p4mOAWbAUJGda+cO1+0PE8PXm9 SZd4jvdOI29EudusmRWMiAlKWHiWu716LE6BC1f0DDCxOJx8VYr9b/rvcRNlYSYp6RGV 8j2pJuWfCmcrge6IskaINSjidWtwPJyDsRvXQ= Received: by 10.150.47.32 with SMTP id u32mr8067220ybu.125.1263924080571; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:01:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.0.151? (129-130-17-190.fibertel.com.ar [190.17.130.129]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 7sm2673862ywc.21.2010.01.19.10.01.18 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:01:20 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B55F369.4070502@gont.com.ar> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 15:01:13 -0300 From: Fernando Gont User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ipv6@ietf.org CC: v6ops@ops.ietf.org Subject: Implementation of the RA Route Information (RFC 4191) option? X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 OpenPGP: id=D076FFF1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hello, folks, Anybody knows whether this option has been implemented in, say, KAME, USAGI, Cisco's, Juniper's, Microsoft Windows, etc.? Thanks, -- Fernando Gont e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@acm.org PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1 From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 19 10:17:56 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 642B33A69C2 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:17:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.603 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.603 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.004, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Iv3I8Z6EXvSk for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:17:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 986EF3A6782 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:17:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NXIaK-000CVD-IA for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:13:48 +0000 Received: from [130.76.96.56] (helo=stl-smtpout-01.boeing.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NXIaF-000CUg-QR for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:13:43 +0000 Received: from stl-av-01.boeing.com (stl-av-01.boeing.com [192.76.190.6]) by stl-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/8.14.0/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id o0JIDXHA021322 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 19 Jan 2010 12:13:33 -0600 (CST) Received: from stl-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by stl-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o0JIDWIZ017918; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 12:13:33 -0600 (CST) Received: from XCH-NWHT-06.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwht-06.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.25.110]) by stl-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o0JIDWT7017905 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Tue, 19 Jan 2010 12:13:32 -0600 (CST) Received: from XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.64.97]) by XCH-NWHT-06.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.25.110]) with mapi; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:13:32 -0800 From: "Templin, Fred L" To: Fernando Gont , "ipv6@ietf.org" CC: "v6ops@ops.ietf.org" Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:13:30 -0800 Subject: RE: Implementation of the RA Route Information (RFC 4191) option? Thread-Topic: Implementation of the RA Route Information (RFC 4191) option? Thread-Index: AcqZMcWZ/OGh+1cpRjqz3d42eMWP9gAAMZMw Message-ID: References: <4B55F369.4070502@gont.com.ar> In-Reply-To: <4B55F369.4070502@gont.com.ar> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Fernando, It appears that there is an implementation in the main Linux kernel. Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com > -----Original Message----- > From: ipv6-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of F= ernando Gont > Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 10:01 AM > To: ipv6@ietf.org > Cc: v6ops@ops.ietf.org > Subject: Implementation of the RA Route Information (RFC 4191) option? >=20 > Hello, folks, >=20 > Anybody knows whether this option has been implemented in, say, KAME, > USAGI, Cisco's, Juniper's, Microsoft Windows, etc.? >=20 > Thanks, > -- > Fernando Gont > e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@acm.org > PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > ipv6@ietf.org > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 19 13:54:36 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20E463A6801 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:54:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XYo7ZiJoIogj for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:54:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72FA73A67DB for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:54:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NXLvF-00074y-5H for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 21:47:37 +0000 Received: from [198.24.6.3] (helo=imr2.ericy.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NXLvB-00074k-UJ for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 21:47:34 +0000 Received: from eusaamw0707.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.32]) by imr2.ericy.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id o0JLllrJ005306; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 15:47:48 -0600 Received: from [142.133.10.113] (147.117.20.212) by eusaamw0707.eamcs.ericsson.se (147.117.20.92) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.1.375.2; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 16:47:17 -0500 Message-ID: <4B5627B2.9040002@ericsson.com> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 16:44:18 -0500 From: Suresh Krishnan User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fernando Gont CC: "ipv6@ietf.org" , "v6ops@ops.ietf.org" Subject: Re: Implementation of the RA Route Information (RFC 4191) option? References: <4B55F369.4070502@gont.com.ar> In-Reply-To: <4B55F369.4070502@gont.com.ar> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hi Fernando, radvd, which is a router advertisement daemon running on Linux, supports this option. Cheers Suresh On 10-01-19 01:01 PM, Fernando Gont wrote: > Hello, folks, > > Anybody knows whether this option has been implemented in, say, KAME, > USAGI, Cisco's, Juniper's, Microsoft Windows, etc.? > > Thanks, From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 19 18:41:53 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D095D3A67E6 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:41:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.677 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.677 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Pg9tR4UeC2aa for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:41:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8B413A6784 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:41:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NXQOU-0004iL-EU for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 02:34:06 +0000 Received: from [209.85.160.42] (helo=mail-pw0-f42.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NXQOS-0004hz-6o for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 02:34:04 +0000 Received: by pwj9 with SMTP id 9so2979398pwj.1 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:34:03 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.67.11 with SMTP id p11mr1575461wfa.342.1263954842858; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:34:02 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1F22A806-8341-4FB0-8135-3518574C7661@cisco.com> References: <1F22A806-8341-4FB0-8135-3518574C7661@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 00:34:02 -0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 35618348867ca9f3 Message-ID: <45e3c45f1001191834j8a3e80r2f94d7ffdf9101eb@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-v6inixp-04.txt WGLC From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Eduardo_Ascen=E7o_Reis?= To: Fred Baker Cc: v6ops@ops.ietf.org, kurtis@kurtis.pp.se, rbonica@juniper.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hi Fred and Fellows, 2010/1/18 Fred Baker : > We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the documen= t > as well as its content. If you have read the document and believe it to b= e > of operational utility, that is also an important comment to make. > I am directly involved with IXP (http://ptt.br/) - already with IPv6 support - and believe that this is an important document that should be discussed and supported by this working group. I will do some comments on separated messages. --=20 Eduardo Ascen=E7o Reis From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 19 18:58:55 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 913073A685E for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:58:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.677 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.677 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AFajqCu+ve-b for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:58:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E78053A6833 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:58:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NXQid-0006RT-KA for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 02:54:55 +0000 Received: from [209.85.222.174] (helo=mail-pz0-f174.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NXQia-0006R8-TE for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 02:54:52 +0000 Received: by pzk4 with SMTP id 4so3538445pzk.32 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:54:52 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.195.19 with SMTP id s19mr47233wff.312.1263956092245; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:54:52 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <308E2D25-1AEC-4B90-8FC3-6BCFFFA9DCDC@nosignal.org> References: <1F22A806-8341-4FB0-8135-3518574C7661@cisco.com> <308E2D25-1AEC-4B90-8FC3-6BCFFFA9DCDC@nosignal.org> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 00:54:52 -0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 033094bfde1b28e6 Message-ID: <45e3c45f1001191854j7dcfc73erf0beecf91c97b1a6@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-v6inixp-04.txt WGLC From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Eduardo_Ascen=E7o_Reis?= To: Andy Davidson Cc: v6ops@ops.ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: 2010/1/18 Andy Davidson : > 6 - Route servers - md5 should be considered - I think this advice should= be > taken out, as this recommendation is not generally accepted, and the > functioning/configuration of a route-server is well outside the scope of > this document. I agree with Andy and also suggest that the following sentence to be removed from the document: "The use of MD5 [RFC2385] or IPSEC [RFC4301] to authenticate the BGP sessions and the use of GTSM (The Generalized TTL Security Mechanism) [RFC3682] should be considered." I understand that these mechanisms may help securing the BGP session, but also that they do not fit well on an IPv6 operational document. > 6 - Route servers - we may like to publish some information on v6 filteri= ng > to promote good hygiene between route-server peers. I agree. I also suggest to replace the word studied with considered on the following sentence: "Because of the size of the IPv6 space, limiting the maximum number of IPv6 prefixes in every session should be studied." []s, --=20 Eduardo Ascen=E7o Reis From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Wed Jan 20 03:20:21 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80B163A69EF for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 03:20:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ff6I+60KuQpx for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 03:20:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 057A73A6AAD for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 03:20:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NXYTd-0001q5-2H for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:11:57 +0000 Received: from [2001:670:86:3001::1] (helo=netcore.fi) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NXYTZ-0001pd-Aa for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:11:54 +0000 Received: from netcore.fi (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by netcore.fi (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o0KBBntB008729 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 13:11:49 +0200 Received: from localhost (pekkas@localhost) by netcore.fi (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) with ESMTP id o0KBBnEc008726 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 13:11:49 +0200 Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 13:11:49 +0200 (EET) From: Pekka Savola To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org Subject: Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-v6inixp-04.txt WGLC In-Reply-To: <1F22A806-8341-4FB0-8135-3518574C7661@cisco.com> Message-ID: References: <1F22A806-8341-4FB0-8135-3518574C7661@cisco.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LRH 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.95.3 at otso.netcore.fi X-Virus-Status: Clean Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Fred Baker wrote: > This is to initiate a two week working group last call of > draft-ietf-v6ops-v6inixp-04.txt. I agree with earlier comments that S 6 suggestions on MD5, GTSM, IPsec etc. may not be warranted especially in looking glass, route collection or similar scenarios. The suggestions in the latter part of the 2nd paragraph seem to be talking more about IPv6 peering sessions between participants than ones to the IX. I don't think this document needs to discuss the participants' BGP sessions (for exchanging routes to forward production traffic) at all, but if it does, I strongly think it needs to be a separate section. substantial ----------- The exchange point addresses are intended for the peering mesh, e.g. from RIPE document: "Many Exchange Point operators require address space for the peering mesh that is independent from any of the address space in use by member networks." (http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-451.html) The last part of Section 3 describes an IXP operators decision that the addresses need to be globally routed. The latter part discusses globally routed services by the ISP. The IXP prefix is not meant for that, and it is not generally accepted in DFZ routing. For globally routable address space, other addresses should be obtained. The last sentence in S 3 mentions it briefly but this should be clearer. I suggest the following rewording: ====== IPv6 prefixes for IXP LANs are typically publicly well known and taken from dedicated IPv6 blocks for IXP assignments reserved for this purpose by the different RIRs. These blocks are usually only meant for addressing the exchange fabric, and may be filtered out by DFZ (Default Free Zone) operators. When considering the routing of the IXP LANs two options are identified: o IXPs may decide that LANs should not to be globally routed in order to limit the possible origins of a Denial of Service (DoS) attack to its participants' AS boundaries. In this configuration participants may route these prefixes inside their networks (e. g. using BGP no-export communities or routing the IXP LANs within the participants' IGP) to perform fault management. Using this configuration, the monitoring of the IXP LANs from outside of its participants' AS boundaries is not possible. o IXP may decide that LANs should (attempt to be) be globally routed. In this case, IXP LANs monitoring from outside its participants' AS boundaries may be possible but the IXP LANs will be vulnerable to DoS from outside of those boundaries. Additionally, possible IXP external services (such as dns, web pages, ftp servers) need to be globally routed. These should be addressed from separate address blocks, either from upstream providers' address space, or separate independent assignments. Strict prefix length filtering could be a reason for requesting more than one /48 assignment from a RIR (i.e. requesting one /48 assignment for the IXPs LANs that may not be globally routed and a different, non-IXP /48 assignment for the IXP external services that will be globally routed). ============== semi-editorial/substantial -------------------------- 2. independent LAN: an exclusive IPv6 LAN is created for IPv6 traffic. If IXP participants are already using Virtual LAN (VLAN) tagging on the interfaces of their routers that are facing the IXP switch, this only requires passing one additional VLAN tag across the interconnection. If participants are using untagged interconnections with the IXP switch and wish to continue doing so, they will need to provision a separate physical port to access the IPv6-specific LAN. .. the last sentence assumes untagged VLAN which is not given. From textual perspective, "If participants are using.." is confusing. This is the design decision of the IXP _operator_, not the (individual) participants. Example rewording: 2. independent LAN: an exclusive IPv6 LAN is created for IPv6 traffic. If IXP already uses Virtual LAN (VLAN) tagging, participants are only required to passing one additional VLAN tag across the interconnection. If IXP does not use VLAN tagging, VLAN tagging needs to be established. Previous use may continue untagged as a "native VLAN" or be transitioned to a tagged VLAN. The "independent LAN" configuration provides a physical separation for IPv4 and IPv6 traffic simplifying separate analysis for IPv4 and IPv6 traffic. However, it can be more costly in both capital expenses (if new ports are needed) and operational expends. .. The last sentence is not the whole picture, and should be deleted or rephrased. Additional ports are not necessary, see above. FWIW, typically participants terminate IPv4 and IPv6 LANs at the same device and these are just logical subinterfaces. As such the next sentence also requires rewording as its unnecessarily biased: Conversely, the dual-stack implementation allows a quick and capital cost-free start-up for IPv6 support in the IXP, allowing the IXP to avoid transforming untagged ports into tagged ports. The only technical requirement for IPv6 referring link MTUs is that they need to be greater than or equal to 1280 octets [RFC2460]. Common MTU sizes in IXPs are 1500, 4470, or 9216 bytes. .. is this IP MTU? I do not think 9216 is true in this case. E.g. in Juniper equipment (common in IXP PE routers) the max _Ethernet_ MTU is 9192 bytes (9188 IP MTU). I do not believe there are common router products that even support IP MTU of 9216 bytes (yes, some switches support ethernet mtu of 9216 bytes but that's different). Because eth mtu changes depending on vlan tagging and/or whether you count various ethernet stuff in it, it's best to only discuss IP mtu here. The MTU size for every LAN in an IXP should be well known by all its participants. .. you could also make this stronger and replace "well known and uniformally adhered to" -- there will be blackholing if everyone is not using the same MTU (esp. issues with jumbo sizes! and if you change vlan tagging, the mtu "calculations" might change unless you're careful!) 7. External and Internal support Some external services that need to have IPv6 support are traffic graphics, DNS, FTP, Web, Route Server and Looking Glass. [...] .. I'd maybe add that "In many cases, these are subcontracted or otherwise acquired from exchange participants or third parties." This is the "ISP-side" of IXP business and that should be kept distinct from the IPv6 peering fabric issues. 10. Security Considerations This memo includes procedures for monitoring and/or avoiding particular ICMPv6 traffic at IXPs' LANs. It also mentions how to limit IPv6 DoS attacks to the IXP switch fabric by not globally announce the IXP LANs prefix. .. Maybe it should be mentioend here that neither the IPv4 ARP filtering, nor the describes IPv6 multicast filtering will prevent Ethernet loops from causing mischief in the LAN. The latter sentence should be removed or rephrased per above. nits ---- - p3 reference to SNMP (RFC1157) should be updated as 1157 is Histroci. - p3 spell out "LAN" when first used -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings From secmech-request@lists.ietf.org Wed Jan 20 11:33:41 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D4673A63EB for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:33:41 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:33:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from advantistech.com (unknown [189.135.248.145]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id E53B628C0EA for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:33:15 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: New Year Sales To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100120193332.E53B628C0EA@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:33:15 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 89878 Inc. All rights reserved.

From vaa26592@ietf.org Fri Jan 22 03:35:45 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D19273A6956 for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2010 03:35:45 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Fri, 22 Jan 2010 03:35:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from altertrading.com (unknown [91.187.25.181]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id EED003A68B7 for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2010 03:35:39 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: Your Future Order with 70% off retail To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100122113543.EED003A68B7@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 03:35:39 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 27640 Inc. All rights reserved.

From user@ietf.org Fri Jan 22 16:56:47 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EB913A659B for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2010 16:56:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -29.293 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-29.293 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vzG9Tv6h90PQ for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2010 16:56:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from c-76-110-204-18.hsd1.fl.comcast.net (c-76-110-204-18.hsd1.fl.comcast.net [76.110.204.18]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id DF8DA3A63EC for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2010 16:56:29 -0800 (PST) To: Subject: ALM Works From: Wiley Robles MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100123005642.DF8DA3A63EC@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 16:56:29 -0800 (PST)
Click here to view message online

v6ops-archive, to make this picture visible, click here!

Thanks for joining our mailing list, v6ops-archive@ietf.org
 REMOVE me | Add me | Manage my settings | Contact Customer Service

Copyright 2009 Vuhe Media, Inc. All rights reserved.


Terms of service     Privacy policy

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Fri Jan 22 19:11:54 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C4103A683F for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:11:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -68.422 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-68.422 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_EQ_SK=1.35, HOST_EQ_SK=0.555, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URIBL_BLACK=20, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aKKpaQ1Ncbz1 for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:11:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from edunet-static-225.87-197-45.telecom.sk (edunet-static-225.87-197-45.telecom.sk [87.197.45.225]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70ED33A677D for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:11:46 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100123031146.70ED33A677D@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:11:46 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Jrymo Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Fri Jan 22 19:12:26 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 930643A67FF for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:12:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -48.422 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-48.422 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_EQ_SK=1.35, HOST_EQ_SK=0.555, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_SBL=20, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2hgvLGotnIsd for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:12:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from edunet-static-225.87-197-45.telecom.sk (edunet-static-225.87-197-45.telecom.sk [87.197.45.225]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCDC23A677D for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:12:18 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100123031218.DCDC23A677D@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:12:18 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Inofi Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Fri Jan 22 19:13:20 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E02C3A677D for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:13:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -48.422 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-48.422 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_EQ_SK=1.35, HOST_EQ_SK=0.555, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_SBL=20, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OqpRkCapk0j8 for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:13:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from edunet-static-225.87-197-45.telecom.sk (edunet-static-225.87-197-45.telecom.sk [87.197.45.225]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 793803A6900 for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:13:08 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100123031310.793803A6900@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:13:08 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Fuejd Corporation.
All rights reserved

From shanghaiedy@cmcindia.com Sat Jan 23 04:34:44 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE9043A68F9 for ; Sat, 23 Jan 2010 04:34:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -31.674 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-31.674 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qVmmIfPIOFMr for ; Sat, 23 Jan 2010 04:34:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from bb116-15-14-228.singnet.com.sg (bb116-15-14-228.singnet.com.sg [116.15.14.228]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 736023A68C6 for ; Sat, 23 Jan 2010 04:34:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from 116.15.14.228 by cmcindia.com; Sat, 23 Jan 2010 20:34:08 +0800 Message-ID: <000d01ca9c28$5b7687c0$6400a8c0@shanghaiedy> From: To: Subject: If you are disappointed in its second half, bold, come in! Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 20:34:08 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_044C_01CA9C28.5B7687C0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8089.726 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8089.726 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_044C_01CA9C28.5B7687C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable If you are disappointed in its second half, bold, come in! Click everybody ------=_NextPart_000_044C_01CA9C28.5B7687C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
If you are disappointed in its second half, bold,= come in! Click every= body
------=_NextPart_000_044C_01CA9C28.5B7687C0-- From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Sat Jan 23 08:34:21 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84A863A693D for ; Sat, 23 Jan 2010 08:34:21 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: <0To49VOJqnbp> X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char A9 hex): From: \251 VIAGRA \256 Offic[...] X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -34.084 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-34.084 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RATWARE_MS_HASH=1.398, RATWARE_OUTLOOK_NONAME=2.171, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0To49VOJqnbp for ; Sat, 23 Jan 2010 08:34:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from 188-172-134-95.pool.ukrtel.net (188-172-134-95.pool.ukrtel.net [95.134.172.188]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 625F73A6901 for ; Sat, 23 Jan 2010 08:34:19 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [70.84.10.628] X-Originating-Email: [v6ops-archive@ietf.org] X-Sender: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Message-Id: <0c8801ca9c5a$afbc1890$bcac865f@microsof-f1df45> From: © VIAGRA ® Official Site To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: RE: UK MensHealth Discount ID993485 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 08:34:19 -0800 (PST) Welcome to WebMD
Welcome to WebMD
23.1.2010
New from WebMD: Dear v6ops-archive@ietf.org Sign-up today!

You are subscribed as v6ops-archive@ietf.org.
View and manage your WebMD newsletter preferences.
Subscribe to more newsletters. Change/update your email address.

WebMD Privacy Policy
WebMD Office of Privacy
1175 Peachtree Street, Suite 2400, Atlanta, GA 30361
2010 WebMD, LLC. All rights reserved.
From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Sun Jan 24 04:35:28 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E8EF3A67DA for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 04:35:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.456 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.456 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_DHCP=1.398, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HELO_EQ_CPE=0.5, HOST_EQ_CPE=0.979, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_OB_SURBL=10, URIBL_SC_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4SmtaiRxqxoZ for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 04:35:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from cpe-76-94-97-235.socal.res.rr.com (cpe-76-94-97-235.socal.res.rr.com [76.94.97.235]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 92C4E3A6774 for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 04:35:21 -0800 (PST) To: Subject: Your order #044077 From: Guillermo Bowen MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100124123524.92C4E3A6774@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 04:35:21 -0800 (PST)
Click here to view message online

v6ops-archive, to make this picture visible, click here!

Thanks for joining our mailing list, v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org
 REMOVE me | Add me | Manage my settings | Contact Customer Service

Copyright 2009 Vuhe Media, Inc. All rights reserved.


Terms of service     Privacy policy

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Sun Jan 24 09:30:37 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1EDC3A6902 for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 09:30:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -62.642 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-62.642 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_EQ_PL=1.135, HOST_EQ_PL=1.95, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URIBL_BLACK=20, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MbMnf1Evju2H for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 09:30:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from h228009.net.pulawy.pl (h228009.net.pulawy.pl [82.177.228.9]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80CC13A6901 for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 09:30:30 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100124173030.80CC13A6901@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 09:30:30 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Dycazu Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Sun Jan 24 09:31:21 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A52A53A6917 for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 09:31:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -42.642 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-42.642 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_EQ_PL=1.135, HOST_EQ_PL=1.95, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_SBL=20, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jWhy+IjlALSE for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 09:31:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from h228009.net.pulawy.pl (h228009.net.pulawy.pl [82.177.228.9]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FCDF3A6912 for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 09:31:14 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100124173114.3FCDF3A6912@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 09:31:14 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Jysjjuijw Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Sun Jan 24 09:33:19 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE3D53A6917 for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 09:33:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -42.642 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-42.642 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_EQ_PL=1.135, HOST_EQ_PL=1.95, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_SBL=20, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L6NQjoqrKxv8 for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 09:33:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from h228009.net.pulawy.pl (h228009.net.pulawy.pl [82.177.228.9]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D82D3A6912 for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 09:33:12 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100124173312.8D82D3A6912@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 09:33:12 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Upyfyxqhy Corporation.
All rights reserved

From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Sun Jan 24 14:36:39 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59AF83A67A5 for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 14:36:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.373 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.373 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.226, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xZt4qzM5eh2M for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 14:36:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 841F53A696D for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 14:36:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZAy9-000N9r-VL for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 22:30:09 +0000 Received: from [2001:1890:1112:1::20] (helo=mail.ietf.org) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZAy7-000N9P-DB for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 22:30:07 +0000 Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id 0E7AC3A6994; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 14:30:01 -0800 (PST) From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: v6ops@ops.ietf.org Subject: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-04.txt Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100124223002.0E7AC3A6994@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 14:30:02 -0800 (PST) Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the IETF. Title : Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge Routers Author(s) : H. Singh, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-04.txt Pages : 15 Date : 2010-01-24 This document specifies requirements for an IPv6 Customer Edge (CE) router. Specifically, the current version of this document focuses on the basic provisioning of an IPv6 CE router and the provisioning of IPv6 hosts attached to it. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-04.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-04.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2010-01-24142847.I-D@ietf.org> --NextPart-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Sun Jan 24 14:38:34 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F99F3A6954 for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 14:38:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.118 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.118 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.74, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YkHlfdp8R62h for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 14:38:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32E613A680A for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 14:38:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZAzn-000NNr-OK for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 22:31:51 +0000 Received: from [209.85.218.223] (helo=mail-bw0-f223.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZAzf-000NLy-0S for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 22:31:43 +0000 Received: by bwz23 with SMTP id 23so1314870bwz.39 for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 14:31:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xcyaTPDSlBMyOC24mQZm0qGbgwq+x0gBrWE6Jpog50s=; b=ozEXMxNxka7wgSImcCCvV5yFN60RVaNWYI+DO6g2PfJYOerYFK+mQSVMfOhVsF/82B wmGGiMbowwZ+0KcbM7Zly73m3WzaoE0/Fvk3X3WErqaMMx+eUyGaH0OqD3Ovco6lasYR tCKeGpXgnSF8j5oYxy9GP4BbGOWBAW91EQ594= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=c+37DMXfq6ZhBlv7WRKhOh8LI4NLVCzZi4fqqqGXE7V1H1lazuJem6IuedfK0DesaH vsgAwcX4gk8gB1tV2ZB8DkVHGw+3Ab6u1VIBId0MqdQ7dZNx/UkBA5YXVLF7+fpm35J7 qVaPwHNG+rHAnHO/DW94itf/QNmq0DeiMA4J4= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.2.75 with SMTP id 11mr2264946bki.144.1264372301326; Sun, 24 Jan 2010 14:31:41 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> References: <4A7130F4-2117-4EC1-A8AC-8D5608EE4FC0@cisco.com> Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 23:31:41 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 0ed841d384d1e654 Message-ID: <2bbba3c11001241431l3d69b84eke9b7de7d53207011@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt WGLC From: Ole Troan To: Fred Baker Cc: v6ops@ops.ietf.org, kurtis@kurtis.pp.se, rbonica@juniper.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: hi, here is a summary of the issues raised during the last call of this documen= t. in addition to a few spelling errors and nits we have received the following comments: - use DHCPv6 instead of DHCP =3D> accepted. - move the "general requirements" to the top =3D> accepted - change the generic MUST for PPP and Ethernet to "if supported" =3D> accepted - remove reference to PPPoE =3D> accepted - split requirements. especially those which have both MUST and SHOULD =3D> accepted - discussion on the hint given in a PD request- what to do if CE doesn't get a large enough prefix from PD =3D> accepted: clarified text in the requirement. - what to do if the prefix 'hinted' at isn't large enough? =3D> accepted: added text to say that SHOULD raise a system management er= ror. - discussion on how IPv6 only / DS stack hosts should work with NAT64/DNS64 and this draft =3D> rejected: nothing we can do within scope of this draft - some discussion on use of ND and prefix redirection and routing on WAN side interfaces =3D> rejected: not in scope - isRouter flag confusion when CE router is acting as a host =3D> rejected: not considered problematic we have just posted revision 04 which includes the above issues and the nits we received during the last call. Best regards, Ole On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 4:45 PM, Fred Baker wrote: > This is to initiate a two week working group last call of > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt. Please read it now. If you find > nits (spelling errors, minor suggested wording changes, etc), comment to = the > authors; if you find greater issues, such as disagreeing with a statement= or > finding additional issues that need to be addressed, please post your > comments to the list. > > We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the documen= t > as well as its content. If you have read the document and believe it to b= e > of operational utility, that is also an important comment to make. > > > > > On Dec 18, 2009, at 2:45 AM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the IET= F. > > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Title =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : Basic Requirements for IPv6 Cu= stomer Edge Routers > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Author(s) =A0 =A0 =A0 : H. Singh, et al. > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Filename =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router= -03.txt > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Pages =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : 14 > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Date =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: 2009-12-18 > > This document specifies requirements for an IPv6 Customer Edge (CE) > router. =A0Specifically, the current version of this document focuses > on the provisioning of an IPv6 CE router and the provisioning of IPv6 > hosts attached to it. > > Status of this Memo > > This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the > provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. > > Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering > Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. =A0Note that > other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- > Drafts. > > Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months > and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any > time. =A0It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference > material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." > > The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at > http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. > > The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. > > This Internet-Draft will expire on June 21, 2010. > > Copyright Notice > > Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the > document authors. =A0All rights reserved. > > This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal > Provisions Relating to IETF Documents > (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of > publication of this document. =A0Please review these documents > carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect > to this document. =A0Code Components extracted from this document must > include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of > the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as > described in the BSD License. > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.t= xt > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > Internet-Draft. > _______________________________________________ > I-D-Announce mailing list > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html > or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > > http://www.ipinc.net/IPv4.GIF > > > From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 25 01:03:36 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 720773A683D for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 01:03:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.744, BAYES_00=-2.599, FRT_BELOW2=2.154, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NTIRtmFryQlU for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 01:03:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68F3C3A6405 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 01:03:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZKjc-000IQ7-EP for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:55:48 +0000 Received: from [209.85.220.223] (helo=mail-fx0-f223.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZKjX-000IP2-Vt for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:55:44 +0000 Received: by fxm23 with SMTP id 23so3449808fxm.38 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 00:55:42 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=czFdx1+ZHfwpEG6J0fg8jRyL7HsIDFSCgMnuDZkBVTs=; b=Crz4tizXVyTU7pqBTjOfsuXdHKJQPKsqPGqXtHNN9npv2hSXtxna9DWt+IATaf29p2 wr4sROhoznrRhBDXcjP+PAfYHBFCZlRQ3bf9dZaLc01it4RvjTl3q3Ey7x4cY/hU3Xi0 QCZN35vEYTxvfpxLH7b7/wRIiOVpClmYs0Uuc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=ZcnySXAH7AsvNfGAkv46+4LsPfc4Z3zpn1uSvDtq6R06X39nPhiWX0VpIf/JgEtaVn yMDMrc+r74CEefg+SctNxDqUaVZ3XjkhzLkdYaJR1EHD9NA7KOht72UY9b98VUh20arR vP+2OO95wZqOL2x0+4SiNOuKel+VuY/DQZj5Y= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.103.84.6 with SMTP id m6mr3202145mul.41.1264409742480; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 00:55:42 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 10:55:42 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: IPv6 multihoming From: Vlad Ion To: shim6@ietf.org, v6ops@ops.ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e65ae9148d1818047df955bf Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --0016e65ae9148d1818047df955bf Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi, For a year now whenever it comes to IPv6 telco implementations I keep facing 2 problems so I was hoping you can guide me towards find a group that deals with these issues or discussion solutions. The 2 problems are related to IPv6 multi-homing and access to the internet in IPv6 format for a quick transitions from v4 to v6. Also I need some guidance as to what needs to be done for a draft document proposal to be created about the proposed solutions mentioned bellow and who needs to be involved in this process. As far as multi-homing goes in IPv6 the solution discussion generated by using provider-independent address space like mentioned in draft-hain-ipv6-pi-addr-10 seems too complicated to implement efficiently and generates a lot of unnecessary work. Because IPv6 will never really be adopted by ISPs, telco and enterprises until it offers a feasible multi-homing solution my proposal is that some solutions are redefined such as provider independent address space and the 6to4 standard. I propose that the 6to4 ip conversion space from ipv4 addresses to 2002::ipv6 space will be redefined as provider independent address space. This way whoever wants to implement ipv6 with multi-homing can simply redefine their existing IPv4 addresses in IPv6 6to4 format and have multi-homing in ipv6. Everyone already uses ipv4 multi-homing with success so I see no point in defining a new addressing system for v6 when everyone can simply use the same v4 address space for multi-homing but converted in 6to4 format. Also, another issue faced by whoever uses IPv6 is that access to the internet in v6 format is limited so a proposal has to be made to the RIRs to offer incentives such as free IPv6 space for anyone who implements 6to4 relay routers and advertises their existing v4 space in v6 format along with the newly received free v6 space. I believe that as long as ietf gets involved and a rfc is written on these 2 proposals starting with the redefining of the provider independent address space and its inclusion in the 6to4 format things will be a lot more compact and give some additional momentum to the IPv6 migration process. Best regards and I hope to hear from you soon, Vlad Ion Siemens PSE IP backbone design engineer --0016e65ae9148d1818047df955bf Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi,

For a year now whenever it comes to IPv6 telco implementations I= keep facing 2 problems so I was hoping you can guide me towards find a gro= up that deals with these issues or discussion solutions. The 2 problems are= related to IPv6 multi-homing and access to the internet in IPv6 format for= a quick transitions from v4 to v6. Also I need some guidance as to what ne= eds to be done for a draft document proposal to be created about the propos= ed solutions mentioned bellow and who needs to be involved in this process.=

As far as multi-homing goes in IPv6 the solution discussion generated b= y using provider-independent address space like mentioned in draft-hain-ipv= 6-pi-addr-10 seems too complicated to implement efficiently and generates a= lot of unnecessary work. Because IPv6 will never really be adopted by ISPs= , telco and enterprises until it offers a feasible multi-homing solution my= proposal is that some solutions are redefined such as provider independent= address space and the 6to4 standard.

I propose that the 6to4 ip conversion space from ipv4 addresses to 2002= ::ipv6 space will be redefined as provider independent address space. This = way whoever wants to implement ipv6 with multi-homing can simply redefine t= heir existing IPv4 addresses in IPv6 6to4 format and have multi-homing in i= pv6. Everyone already uses ipv4 multi-homing with success so I see no point= in defining a new addressing system for v6 when everyone can simply use th= e same v4 address space for multi-homing but converted in 6to4 format.

Also, another issue faced by whoever uses IPv6 is that access to the in= ternet in v6 format is limited so a proposal has to be made to the RIRs to = offer incentives such as free IPv6 space for anyone who implements 6to4 rel= ay routers and advertises their existing v4 space in v6 format along with t= he newly received free v6 space.

I believe that as long as ietf gets involved and a rfc is written on th= ese 2 proposals starting with the redefining of=A0 the provider independent= address space and its inclusion in the 6to4 format things will be a lot mo= re compact and give some additional momentum to the IPv6 migration process.=

Best regards and I hope to hear from you soon,
Vlad Ion

Sieme= ns PSE
IP backbone design engineer
--0016e65ae9148d1818047df955bf-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 25 02:54:03 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E39B3A677D for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 02:54:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.445 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.445 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, FRT_BELOW2=2.154, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2XwEsGFBRjJ1 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 02:54:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 023FF3A672E for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 02:54:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZMUa-0005Rp-MD for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 10:48:24 +0000 Received: from [2001:738:0:411::241] (helo=mail.ki.iif.hu) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZMUM-0005Qh-Sx for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 10:48:11 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mail.ki.iif.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9790786BCC; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:48:08 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at mignon.ki.iif.hu Received: from mail.ki.iif.hu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mignon.ki.iif.hu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 3m21kOvHjSTj; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:48:05 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail.ki.iif.hu (Postfix, from userid 9002) id B4A5786BCB; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:48:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.ki.iif.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id A860686BC7; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:48:05 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:48:05 +0100 (CET) From: Mohacsi Janos X-X-Sender: mohacsi@mignon.ki.iif.hu To: Vlad Ion cc: shim6@ietf.org, v6ops@ops.ietf.org Subject: Re: IPv6 multihoming In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="0-927086415-1264416485=:97205" Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --0-927086415-1264416485=:97205 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Mon, 25 Jan 2010, Vlad Ion wrote: > Hi, > > For a year now whenever it comes to IPv6 telco implementations I keep facing 2 problems so I was hoping you can > guide me towards find a group that deals with these issues or discussion solutions. The 2 problems are related to > IPv6 multi-homing and access to the internet in IPv6 format for a quick transitions from v4 to v6. Also I need some > guidance as to what needs to be done for a draft document proposal to be created about the proposed solutions > mentioned bellow and who needs to be involved in this process. > > As far as multi-homing goes in IPv6 the solution discussion generated by using provider-independent address space > like mentioned in draft-hain-ipv6-pi-addr-10 seems too complicated to implement efficiently and generates a lot of > unnecessary work. Because IPv6 will never really be adopted by ISPs, telco and enterprises until it offers a > feasible multi-homing solution my proposal is that some solutions are redefined such as provider independent address > space and the 6to4 standard. > > I propose that the 6to4 ip conversion space from ipv4 addresses to 2002::ipv6 space will be redefined as provider > independent address space. This way whoever wants to implement ipv6 with multi-homing can simply redefine their > existing IPv4 addresses in IPv6 6to4 format and have multi-homing in ipv6. Everyone already uses ipv4 multi-homing > with success so I see no point in defining a new addressing system for v6 when everyone can simply use the same v4 > address space for multi-homing but converted in 6to4 format. I believe this more a policy and RIR business to treat 2002:pi_ipv4 as PI IPV6. May I have some questions: 1. Do you want to treat differently 2002:pi_ipv4 and 2002:pa_ipv4? 2. How do you recognise that a particular IPv4 address PI or PA? 3. How do you prevent everybody to use their IPv4 address as PI IPv6 address? 4. What will happen if everybody will use their single /32 IPv4 address as IPv6 PI address space? Everybody should accept /48 in IPv6 routing? 5. Who will operate 6to4 relays? Every Tier1? Every ISP? Every PI customer? Everybody? > > Also, another issue faced by whoever uses IPv6 is that access to the internet in v6 format is limited so a proposal > has to be made to the RIRs to offer incentives such as free IPv6 space for anyone who implements 6to4 relay routers > and advertises their existing v4 space in v6 format along with the newly received free v6 space. 6to4 is very good solution for interconnect IPv6 islands, but fundamentally relying on existing IPv4 infrastructure. In long term the IPv4 usage should be decreased as IPv6 fully adopted. > > I believe that as long as ietf gets involved and a rfc is written on these 2 proposals starting with the redefining > of  the provider independent address space and its inclusion in the 6to4 format things will be a lot more compact > and give some additional momentum to the IPv6 migration process. Best Regards, Janos Mohacsi --0-927086415-1264416485=:97205-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 25 03:43:31 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47E8D3A6978 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 03:43:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.072 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.072 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.372, BAYES_00=-2.599, FRT_BELOW2=2.154, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id S+KDY-HEajlX for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 03:43:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E65EA3A6919 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 03:43:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZNGp-000Bsq-Tb for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:38:15 +0000 Received: from [209.85.220.223] (helo=mail-fx0-f223.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZNGa-000Bq0-TC for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:38:01 +0000 Received: by fxm23 with SMTP id 23so3590170fxm.38 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 03:37:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=O98ippeRVRVGhSIPqiPu7/0/cMhubVnOamPcXZtKTm4=; b=EPp0sNWZ6dejMg/BFaz6mKKeva5YWin189ManUeQKN2OnkfJfJMA3Hk4AOCeSu5uiz Vqq/OTohvj8ZZU/VOgXSBNFhg90VmFHduaj8kII9ZuX9k66WlMwMd80Q2pymhnb1pF+I 8N2W6KvahhLjRdGsJcTpzLUzLA6fUGtJ35i1w= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=ZrSejPApITGfySxxRitpEC/x8ybRsKt2A5oc5sNjvafHwFNtvK1makfe9PVBjD8GZU E66Ig10buKYlMmNmuX9YMepOCS9xsNHisuTjeV4OFLLAbaUi2wlyL0ZioDK2YS6r2Raq T0e/3yjzS/UO8v3MMSSBb3h4kAMzV8cFADzc4= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.103.67.31 with SMTP id u31mr1109613muk.122.1264419479160; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 03:37:59 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:37:59 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: IPv6 multihoming From: Vlad Ion To: Mohacsi Janos Cc: shim6@ietf.org, v6ops@ops.ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e65c8e26e7080d047dfb9938 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --0016e65c8e26e7080d047dfb9938 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi Janos, Its simple: 1&2. Make the whole 2002:: class provider independent, not provider aggregable so it will be dedicated for transition and multi-homing purposes only . 3. Just allow everybody to use their IPv4 address as PI IPv6 address. I see no problem with that. It even makes it a lot easier for everyone to transition their existing space to IPv6. 4. Everybody should accept /48 in IPv6 routing just because there's a clear need to have multi-homing and you can't get around it. A simple procedure to reduce, in time, the size of the /48 classes that are announced is for people to slowly give back their v4 space to the RIRs as v6 expansion gains momentum and slowly dedicate v4 and their 2002:: counterparts to multi-homing only. 5. All ISPs and carriers that take the possible RIR offer to take free IPv6 space in exchange to announcing their v4 space in v6 format should deploy 6to4 relays. Relays should also be deployed by anyone wanting to make use of v6 multi-homing. I agree, 6to4 is a good solution, but the problem remains with the slow deployment rate of IPv6. The problems IPv6 has with multihoming were the key factor in all the deployment projects I saw that gave up eventually on IPv6 be it in telco or enterprise scenarios. One fact remains clear as daylight: a unified solution has to be picked that solves the multi-homing issue and a strategy has to be adopted to provide access to the existing v4 internet in v6 form before we run out of v4 space and more and more 2-layer deploayments of NAT will be introduced such as carrier-grade NAT Best regards, Vlad Ion. On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Mohacsi Janos wrote: > > > > On Mon, 25 Jan 2010, Vlad Ion wrote: > > Hi, >> >> For a year now whenever it comes to IPv6 telco implementations I keep >> facing 2 problems so I was hoping you can >> guide me towards find a group that deals with these issues or discussion >> solutions. The 2 problems are related to >> IPv6 multi-homing and access to the internet in IPv6 format for a quick >> transitions from v4 to v6. Also I need some >> guidance as to what needs to be done for a draft document proposal to be >> created about the proposed solutions >> mentioned bellow and who needs to be involved in this process. >> >> As far as multi-homing goes in IPv6 the solution discussion generated by >> using provider-independent address space >> like mentioned in draft-hain-ipv6-pi-addr-10 seems too complicated to >> implement efficiently and generates a lot of >> unnecessary work. Because IPv6 will never really be adopted by ISPs, telco >> and enterprises until it offers a >> feasible multi-homing solution my proposal is that some solutions are >> redefined such as provider independent address >> space and the 6to4 standard. >> >> I propose that the 6to4 ip conversion space from ipv4 addresses to >> 2002::ipv6 space will be redefined as provider >> independent address space. This way whoever wants to implement ipv6 with >> multi-homing can simply redefine their >> existing IPv4 addresses in IPv6 6to4 format and have multi-homing in ipv6. >> Everyone already uses ipv4 multi-homing >> with success so I see no point in defining a new addressing system for v6 >> when everyone can simply use the same v4 >> address space for multi-homing but converted in 6to4 format. >> > > > I believe this more a policy and RIR business to treat 2002:pi_ipv4 as PI > IPV6. May I have some questions: > > 1. Do you want to treat differently 2002:pi_ipv4 and 2002:pa_ipv4? 2. How > do you recognise that a particular IPv4 address PI or PA? > > 3. How do you prevent everybody to use their IPv4 address as PI IPv6 > address? > > 4. What will happen if everybody will use their single /32 IPv4 address as > IPv6 PI address space? Everybody should accept /48 in IPv6 routing? > > 5. Who will operate 6to4 relays? Every Tier1? Every ISP? Every PI customer? > Everybody? > > > > >> Also, another issue faced by whoever uses IPv6 is that access to the >> internet in v6 format is limited so a proposal >> has to be made to the RIRs to offer incentives such as free IPv6 space for >> anyone who implements 6to4 relay routers >> and advertises their existing v4 space in v6 format along with the newly >> received free v6 space. >> > > > 6to4 is very good solution for interconnect IPv6 islands, but fundamentally > relying on existing IPv4 infrastructure. In long term the IPv4 usage should > be decreased as IPv6 fully adopted. > > > >> I believe that as long as ietf gets involved and a rfc is written on these >> 2 proposals starting with the redefining >> of the provider independent address space and its inclusion in the 6to4 >> format things will be a lot more compact >> and give some additional momentum to the IPv6 migration process. >> > > > Best Regards, > Janos Mohacsi --0016e65c8e26e7080d047dfb9938 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Janos,

Its simple:

1&2. Make the whole 2002:: class pr= ovider independent, not provider aggregable so it will be dedicated for tra= nsition and multi-homing purposes only
.
3. Just allow everybody to use their IPv4 address as PI IPv6 address. I see= no problem with that. It even makes it a lot easier for everyone to transi= tion their existing space to IPv6.

4. Everybody should accept /48 in= IPv6 routing just because there's a clear need to have multi-homing an= d you can't get around it. A simple procedure to reduce, in time, the s= ize of the /48 classes that are announced is for people to slowly give back= their v4 space to the RIRs as v6 expansion gains momentum and slowly dedic= ate v4 and their 2002:: counterparts to multi-homing only.

5. All ISPs and carriers that take the possible RIR offer to take free = IPv6 space in exchange to announcing their v4 space in v6 format should dep= loy 6to4 relays. Relays should also be deployed by anyone wanting to make u= se of v6 multi-homing.

I agree, 6to4 is a good solution, but the problem remains with the slow= deployment rate of IPv6. The problems IPv6 has with multihoming were the k= ey factor in all the deployment projects I saw that gave up eventually on I= Pv6 be it in telco or enterprise scenarios.

One fact remains clear as daylight: a unified solution has to be picked= that solves the multi-homing issue and a strategy has to be adopted to pro= vide access to the existing v4 internet in v6 form before we run out of v4 = space and more and more 2-layer deploayments of NAT will be introduced such= as carrier-grade NAT


Best regards,
Vlad Ion.

On Mon= , Jan 25, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Mohacsi Janos <mohacsi@niif.hu> wrote:



On Mon, 25 Jan 2010, Vlad Ion wrote:

Hi,

For a year now whenever it comes to IPv6 telco implementations I keep facin= g 2 problems so I was hoping you can
guide me towards find a group that deals with these issues or discussion so= lutions. The 2 problems are related to
IPv6 multi-homing and access to the internet in IPv6 format for a quick tra= nsitions from v4 to v6. Also I need some
guidance as to what needs to be done for a draft document proposal to be cr= eated about the proposed solutions
mentioned bellow and who needs to be involved in this process.

As far as multi-homing goes in IPv6 the solution discussion generated by us= ing provider-independent address space
like mentioned in draft-hain-ipv6-pi-addr-10 seems too complicated to imple= ment efficiently and generates a lot of
unnecessary work. Because IPv6 will never really be adopted by ISPs, telco = and enterprises until it offers a
feasible multi-homing solution my proposal is that some solutions are redef= ined such as provider independent address
space and the 6to4 standard.

I propose that the 6to4 ip conversion space from ipv4 addresses to 2002::ip= v6 space will be redefined as provider
independent address space. This way whoever wants to implement ipv6 with mu= lti-homing can simply redefine their
existing IPv4 addresses in IPv6 6to4 format and have multi-homing in ipv6. = Everyone already uses ipv4 multi-homing
with success so I see no point in defining a new addressing system for v6 w= hen everyone can simply use the same v4
address space for multi-homing but converted in 6to4 format.


I believe this more a policy and RIR business to treat 2002:pi_ipv4 as PI I= PV6. May I have some questions:

1. Do you want to treat differently 2002:pi_ipv4 and 2002:pa_ipv4? 2. How d= o you recognise that a particular IPv4 address PI or PA?

3. How do you prevent everybody to use their IPv4 address as PI IPv6 addres= s?

4. What will happen if everybody will use their single /32 IPv4 address as = IPv6 PI address space? =A0Everybody should accept /48 in IPv6 routing?

5. Who will operate 6to4 relays? Every Tier1? Every ISP? Every PI customer?= Everybody?




Also, another issue faced by whoever uses IPv6 is that access to the intern= et in v6 format is limited so a proposal
has to be made to the RIRs to offer incentives such as free IPv6 space for = anyone who implements 6to4 relay routers
and advertises their existing v4 space in v6 format along with the newly re= ceived free v6 space.


6to4 is very good solution for interconnect IPv6 islands, but fundamentally= relying on existing IPv4 infrastructure. In long term the IPv4 usage shoul= d be decreased as IPv6 fully adopted.



I believe that as long as ietf gets involved and a rfc is written on these = 2 proposals starting with the redefining
of=A0 the provider independent address space and its inclusion in the 6to4 = format things will be a lot more compact
and give some additional momentum to the IPv6 migration process.


Best Regards,
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Janos Mohacsi

--0016e65c8e26e7080d047dfb9938-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 25 04:13:24 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58E373A67B6 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 04:13:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TJkg9zNPtJ6s for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 04:13:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6467E3A65A6 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 04:13:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZNiQ-000Fio-Up for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 12:06:46 +0000 Received: from [2a00:801::f] (helo=uplift.swm.pp.se) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZNiO-000FiJ-JG for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 12:06:44 +0000 Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 6ADEF9C; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:06:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 685469A; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:06:42 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:06:42 +0100 (CET) From: Mikael Abrahamsson To: Vlad Ion cc: Mohacsi Janos , v6ops@ops.ietf.org, shim6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [shim6] IPv6 multihoming In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) Organization: People's Front Against WWW MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Mon, 25 Jan 2010, Vlad Ion wrote: > 3. Just allow everybody to use their IPv4 address as PI IPv6 address. I > see no problem with that. It even makes it a lot easier for everyone to > transition their existing space to IPv6. We do *not* want 300k (or more) routes in IPv6 DFZ. This is a really bad idea. > 4. Everybody should accept /48 in IPv6 routing just because there's a clear > need to have multi-homing and you can't get around it. A simple procedure to > reduce, in time, the size of the /48 classes that are announced is for > people to slowly give back their v4 space to the RIRs as v6 expansion gains > momentum and slowly dedicate v4 and their 2002:: counterparts to > multi-homing only. This will drive DFZ route growth even more. > I agree, 6to4 is a good solution, but the problem remains with the slow > deployment rate of IPv6. The problems IPv6 has with multihoming were the > key factor in all the deployment projects I saw that gave up eventually > on IPv6 be it in telco or enterprise scenarios. 6RD is a better solution and doesn't drive IPv6 DFZ route growth. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 25 05:11:42 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA6CF3A6822 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 05:11:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.604 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.604 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.994, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kJanJcGEJKZD for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 05:11:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 793BA3A680E for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 05:11:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZOeT-000OaS-HI for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:06:45 +0000 Received: from [209.85.220.223] (helo=mail-fx0-f223.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZOeR-000OZk-7a for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:06:43 +0000 Received: by fxm23 with SMTP id 23so3674973fxm.38 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 05:06:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=GI8QTqXhuvqYxtV/AN5lvUbRyfNywDuAOpSEiZ21rSQ=; b=vnoOJE2ATrMvmecfKqCBigWjnsJZk3qeeqV7caVNWKhqNPI9rUUoGlbkBELT/fAUU1 Ur/Xcch8H8IOwVYo9Vk5kxd2vFdxgTT2upl6TRh5bQCgpDfCntZND6X6MK0C/RPCOyUo RGOYRpT9R+gsCXUNPI/ybatLx16GXyTh+3b8U= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=jqPunxvu+P5Ypob9pmoC/Ncu/xSD9NIcMBhoiUOC7eV3xAyZ64Gk2InwX+BEQE1ASX C39YgurYVz2SmPPw4mBAAczD9JCeAm99ZQQC4cSgyWFGqcGBxd2naHMhntW8vSiMEX6O CTM5w1YdgoeHbzcvp9GnCWuJfJN+U+YwYuJPM= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.103.78.36 with SMTP id f36mr3322811mul.74.1264424801345; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 05:06:41 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 15:06:41 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [shim6] IPv6 multihoming From: Vlad Ion To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org, shim6@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e65ae4aa21218d047dfcd796 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --0016e65ae4aa21218d047dfcd796 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Mikael, I mean, is starting in v6 with the same number routes as in v4 more of an issue than not switching to IPv6 fast enough and having to deal with a constant internet user base while people deploy more and more a 2layer NAT solution? I'm asking because the internet deals ok with the existing number of v4 routes and having all new designated classes to ISPs subjected to the PA rule will only reduce the total number of routes or keep it the same if you include new multihoming customers. Best regards, Vlad On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 3:01 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Mon, 25 Jan 2010, Vlad Ion wrote: > > Mikael, >> >> Is it really such a bad thing to start off in IPv6 with the same number of >> routes as in IPv4 and slowly decrease it as providers implement IPv6 from PA >> classes and people announcing small blocks of IPv4? After all, the number of >> blocks announced by people doing multihoming will remain the same in ipv6 >> after a complete transition no matter what PI address space is used. >> >> 6rd is the natural next step in 6to4 development for ISP acceptance but it >> will not make enterprises and telco providers use IPv6 because it lacks a >> proper multi-homing support and using solutions like nat-pt generate a too >> large delay for delay sensitive services such as voice while using the >> existing v4 space translated to v6 format would provide an additional level >> of ease. >> >> Best regards, >> Vlad Ion > > > YES! > > > -- > Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se > --0016e65ae4aa21218d047dfcd796 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mikael,

I mean, is starting in v6 with the same number routes as in = v4 more of an issue than not switching to IPv6 fast enough and having to de= al with a constant internet user base while people deploy more and more a 2= layer NAT solution?

I'm asking because the internet deals ok with the existing number o= f v4 routes and having all new designated classes to ISPs subjected to the = PA rule will only reduce the total number of routes or keep it the same if = you include new multihoming customers.

Best regards,
Vlad

On Mon, Jan 25,= 2010 at 3:01 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jan 2010, Vlad Ion wrote:

Mikael,

Is it really such a bad thing to start off in IPv6 with the same number of routes as in IPv4 and slowly decrease it as providers implement IPv6 from PA classes and people announcing small blocks of IPv4? After all, the number of blocks announced by people doing multihoming will remain the same in ipv6 after a complete transition no matter what PI address space is used.

6rd is the natural next step in 6to4 development for ISP acceptance but it will not make enterprises and telco providers use IPv6 because it lacks a proper multi-homing support and using solutions like nat-pt generate a too large delay for delay sensitive services such as voice while using the existing v4 space translated to v6 format would provide an additional level of ease.

Best regards,
Vlad Ion

YES!


--
Mikael Abrahamsson =A0 =A0email: swmike@swm.pp.se

--0016e65ae4aa21218d047dfcd796-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 25 05:45:40 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C89FE3A69DB for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 05:45:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5aKa-sJEDQkR for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 05:45:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24BF23A69A4 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 05:45:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZP9p-0005Ww-VX for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:39:09 +0000 Received: from [2a00:801::f] (helo=uplift.swm.pp.se) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZP9n-0005UN-Ns for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:39:07 +0000 Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 229B39C; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:39:06 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 204169A; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:39:06 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:39:06 +0100 (CET) From: Mikael Abrahamsson To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org cc: shim6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [shim6] IPv6 multihoming In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) Organization: People's Front Against WWW MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Mon, 25 Jan 2010, Vlad Ion wrote: > I mean, is starting in v6 with the same number routes as in v4 more of an > issue than not switching to IPv6 fast enough and having to deal with a > constant internet user base while people deploy more and more a 2layer NAT > solution? Yes, exploding the IPv6 DFZ routing table from the few thousands to hundreds of thousands in 1-2 years would hamper IPv6 deployment because it increases the cost of the control plane signifcantly. > I'm asking because the internet deals ok with the existing number of v4 > routes and having all new designated classes to ISPs subjected to the PA > rule will only reduce the total number of routes or keep it the same if you > include new multihoming customers. You're talking about doubling the number of routes from the current value, if I understood you correctly, one route for IPv4 and one reciprocal route for IPv6. I'd rather assign all ISPs a /24 IPv6 space for 6RD than your proposed solution. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 25 08:05:07 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53B3E3A683D for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:05:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OQMSuaWlGUCB for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:05:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4F403A67E7 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:05:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZRHT-0001r9-5W for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 15:55:11 +0000 Received: from [2a02:c30:20:1:230:5ff:fe4c:5c42] (helo=shaniqua.netsumo.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZRHQ-0001lc-JD for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 15:55:08 +0000 Received: from [2a02:c30:20:1:648f:b3bd:5071:d472] by shaniqua.netsumo.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NZRHN-0001ge-6y for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 15:55:05 +0000 Message-ID: <4B5DBED1.3050400@nosignal.org> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 15:54:57 +0000 From: Andy Davidson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 Thunderbird/3.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org Subject: Re: IPv6 multihoming References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On 25/01/2010 08:55, Vlad Ion wrote: > I propose that the 6to4 ip conversion space from ipv4 addresses to > 2002::ipv6 space will be redefined as provider independent address > space. This way whoever wants to implement ipv6 with multi-homing can > simply redefine their existing IPv4 addresses in IPv6 6to4 format and > have multi-homing in ipv6. Sorry, this scares me. It is not difficult to get IPv6 PI from the RIRs I have experience with. For example, in Europe, obtaining a single /48 IPv6 PI is a quick process. Obtaining it in this way means that unused v4 is not recycled as spoofable v6, and that organisations with tens of v4 unjoined prefixes need not announced tens of unjoined v6 prefixes when they migrate. I commend you for thinking about ways to encourage networks to adopt v6, but I think that education and advocacy is more future-proof than migrating the v4 swap to v6. Andy From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Mon Jan 25 08:22:38 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17D8228C0F4 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:22:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -48.78 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-48.78 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HELO_EQ_IP_ADDR=1.119, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_BLACK=20, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0p9V-LtCvu4a for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:22:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from 188.4.55.40.dsl.dyn.forthnet.gr (188.4.55.40.dsl.dyn.forthnet.gr [188.4.55.40]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8DF928C0EA for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:22:30 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100125162230.B8DF928C0EA@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:22:30 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Guzuafuq Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Mon Jan 25 08:23:37 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2D8E3A67C1 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:23:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -38.78 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-38.78 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HELO_EQ_IP_ADDR=1.119, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2ifrLqj31iJ6 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:23:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from 188.4.55.40.dsl.dyn.forthnet.gr (188.4.55.40.dsl.dyn.forthnet.gr [188.4.55.40]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5369D3A6851 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:23:30 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100125162330.5369D3A6851@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:23:30 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Isawobesue Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Mon Jan 25 08:24:18 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13BE43A68F1 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:24:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -18.78 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-18.78 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HELO_EQ_IP_ADDR=1.119, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iUPVXyP87pgT for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:24:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from 188.4.55.40.dsl.dyn.forthnet.gr (188.4.55.40.dsl.dyn.forthnet.gr [188.4.55.40]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 823573A67C1 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:24:10 -0800 (PST) From: Genuine Pfizer c Retailer To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Special 80% discount for customer v6ops-archive on all Pfizer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100125162411.823573A67C1@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:24:10 -0800 (PST) Newsletter If you are unable to see the message below, click here to view.

Error loading image. Click to try again

Terms & Conditions | Customer Service Center | Unsubscribe | Change E-mail

We respect your privacy. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

(c) Copyright 2008-2009, Uwjtid Corporation.
All rights reserved

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Mon Jan 25 11:20:27 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCAC03A6878 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:20:27 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char A9 hex): From: \251 VIAGRA \256 Offic[...] X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -11.849 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.849 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RATWARE_MS_HASH=1.398, RATWARE_OUTLOOK_NONAME=2.171, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, SARE_FROM_DRUGS=1.666, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_OB_SURBL=10, URIBL_SC_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id a03jv1vNoXtV for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:20:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from 5ad9b512.bb.sky.com (5ad9b512.bb.sky.com [90.217.181.18]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id ABD4428C0EC for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:20:25 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [33.17.060.927] X-Originating-Email: [v6ops-archive@ietf.org] X-Sender: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Message-Id: <0fb201ca9df3$77c95f20$12b5d95a@system-a11f8346> From: © VIAGRA ® Official Site To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: RE: UK MensHealth Discount ID6740 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:20:25 -0800 (PST) Welcome to WebMD
Welcome to WebMD
25.1.2010
New from WebMD: Dear v6ops-archive@ietf.org Sign-up today!

You are subscribed as v6ops-archive@ietf.org.
View and manage your WebMD newsletter preferences.
Subscribe to more newsletters. Change/update your email address.

WebMD Privacy Policy
WebMD Office of Privacy
1175 Peachtree Street, Suite 2400, Atlanta, GA 30361
2010 WebMD, LLC. All rights reserved.
From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 25 11:53:15 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D72AD3A682E for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:53:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.703 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.703 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.295, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_46=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dtFVq-m8hgpe for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:53:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E67523A6824 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:53:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZUrk-0009qY-8b for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 19:44:52 +0000 Received: from [209.85.218.227] (helo=mail-bw0-f227.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZUrh-0009pF-2N for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 19:44:49 +0000 Received: by bwz27 with SMTP id 27so2865404bwz.1 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:44:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=xJ/cpEtNa+DU9iLsi0vS4Ch9P7xBXuxpdM+eP0+L/Nw=; b=Fh+BZuCk2aPy7H0bH0rr83oLziChnxRwXhMjWNKNymx3Ko/Uf2Du4lQPErgtlxkfIV EvShbvC5zv5yBYzXyKu0df090o/e6mWYtHKdCNxD/CabBptlShruSe76QnAH8gvcI9YE cUpLxt4YAQB1cLSDnyLafuRVFtC1Qt+M+jyI4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=Qv3D5kROBW+z/PEEJc7oIfICDQnM8qa7mtyQFXnwcg7wYRzw8voccs+4w4M08XV9J8 SFCiiCVGEu+sj8f07wz9/FjOWSEkt0tzDIwgWZi/Bo9bmMwVsesQIXeJ9KAIXXSskOkR Qri3W1toCUv7YNiMFRj05enMOgTUPOxlNGdFI= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.103.48.38 with SMTP id a38mr3640127muk.37.1264448687444; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:44:47 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4B5DBED1.3050400@nosignal.org> References: <4B5DBED1.3050400@nosignal.org> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 21:44:47 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: IPv6 multihoming From: Vlad Ion To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org, shim6@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e659f46cda14e8047e0266fb Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --0016e659f46cda14e8047e0266fb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Andy thanks for the heads up. I didn't know it was that easy to obtain a /48 as PI space from RIPE. The issue that Patrick mentioned about the internet in v6 looking more like the holes in swiss cheese still remains. I proposed the conversion of the existing space in 6to4 form as a simple means of providing direct access to the existing v4 internet hosts from any v6 island while moving the translation from the new v6 user.island to those still using v4 space that will start to announce it in v6 form as well. I think that this is a huge step towards encouraging more organizations to switch their networks to pure v6. I do agree that organizations with scattered v4 blocks should announce a larger v6 block instead of several small ones and that's why I think the RIRs should provide all organizations currently having v4 space with free v6 blocks so they'll see financial point from the free addresses in providing their new and existing customers with v6 addresses as well. I really appreciate this discussion especially from that educational and advocacy point of view you mentioned because it is pretty hard to find the necessary information on v6 at the moment and have it clearly available especially to the sales people that take the major decisions in any deployment project. Best regards, Vlad On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Andy Davidson wrote: > On 25/01/2010 08:55, Vlad Ion wrote: > > I propose that the 6to4 ip conversion space from ipv4 addresses to > > 2002::ipv6 space will be redefined as provider independent address > > space. This way whoever wants to implement ipv6 with multi-homing can > > simply redefine their existing IPv4 addresses in IPv6 6to4 format and > > have multi-homing in ipv6. > > Sorry, this scares me. > > It is not difficult to get IPv6 PI from the RIRs I have experience with. > > For example, in Europe, obtaining a single /48 IPv6 PI is a quick > process. Obtaining it in this way means that unused v4 is not recycled > as spoofable v6, and that organisations with tens of v4 unjoined > prefixes need not announced tens of unjoined v6 prefixes when they migrate. > > I commend you for thinking about ways to encourage networks to adopt v6, > but I think that education and advocacy is more future-proof than > migrating the v4 swap to v6. > > Andy > > --0016e659f46cda14e8047e0266fb Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Andy thanks for the heads up. I didn't know it was that easy to obtain = a /48 as PI space from RIPE.

The issue that Patrick mentioned about= the internet in v6 looking more like the holes in swiss cheese still remai= ns. I proposed the conversion of the existing space in 6to4 form as a simpl= e means of providing direct access to the existing v4 internet hosts from a= ny v6 island while moving the translation from the new v6 user.island to th= ose still using v4 space that will start to announce it in v6 form as well.= I think that this is a huge step towards encouraging more organizations to= switch their networks to pure v6.

I do agree that organizations with scattered v4 blocks should announce = a larger v6 block instead of several small ones and that's why I think = the RIRs should provide all organizations currently having v4 space with fr= ee v6 blocks so they'll see financial point from the free addresses in = providing their new and existing customers with v6 addresses as well.

I really appreciate this discussion especially from that educational an= d advocacy point of view you mentioned because it is pretty hard to find th= e necessary information on v6 at the moment and have it clearly available e= specially to the sales people that take the major decisions in any deployme= nt project.

Best regards,
Vlad



On Mon,= Jan 25, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Andy Davidson <andy@nosignal.org> wrote:
On 25/01/2010 08:55, Vlad Ion wrote:
> I propose that the 6to4 ip conversion space from ipv4 addresses to
> 2002::ipv6 space will be redefined as provider independent address
> space. This way whoever wants to implement ipv6 with multi-homing can<= br> > simply redefine their existing IPv4 addresses in IPv6 6to4 format and<= br> > have multi-homing in ipv6.

Sorry, this scares me.

It is not difficult to get IPv6 PI from the RIRs I have experience with.
For example, in Europe, obtaining a single /48 IPv6 PI is a quick
process. =A0Obtaining it in this way means that unused v4 is not recycled as spoofable v6, and that organisations with tens of v4 unjoined
prefixes need not announced tens of unjoined v6 prefixes when they migrate.=

I commend you for thinking about ways to encourage networks to adopt v6, but I think that education and advocacy is more future-proof than
migrating the v4 swap to v6.

Andy


--0016e659f46cda14e8047e0266fb-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 25 13:40:02 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DB6C3A6778 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:40:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id l57wdXZv7EYZ for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:40:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DADA43A67F3 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:40:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZWa3-000PvH-Ax for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 21:34:43 +0000 Received: from [209.85.222.198] (helo=mail-pz0-f198.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZWZz-000Pud-RB for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 21:34:39 +0000 Received: by pzk36 with SMTP id 36so3345020pzk.5 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:34:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=36BfJGTtVmkzaGJM1joqOLO/8R1LWT3Rknr0LgMDNQE=; b=gBjE8WdqxE5ozXBU+UgSwDM0yErABfSqAKjsBP0rlpllsEqZShZ/pOVeVvmDsXVBje MsSMzXSzc+XPktApfg5bw72XfQNIHr4SipLrC72T5S54F0drlQHz9wOa83iUwnNAiCJ2 HCcHw9Mm1NPnr4WCL7EQ1Sh/+tmbP1tDByvN4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=uNQHzI1agsCZPUeb9/mymZW/OFVn1catbGnN1qppq4H3TB5lZB825LE21k7Ps6B/HW Olxb9bFDUOoEb6wnCXN6jGsENc8fgNeYldoedHl8ChqN1Up4g5jn3N5SlvG89iOxMAv0 sKDa4bepzL8/MY4U0KvSIlxwKNqNA9s14CaVk= Received: by 10.142.2.23 with SMTP id 23mr4906895wfb.327.1264455279583; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:34:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?130.216.38.124? (stf-brian.sfac.auckland.ac.nz [130.216.38.124]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 23sm5217445pzk.4.2010.01.25.13.34.37 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:34:39 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B5E0E6C.6010502@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:34:36 +1300 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andy Davidson CC: v6ops@ops.ietf.org Subject: Re: IPv6 multihoming References: <4B5DBED1.3050400@nosignal.org> In-Reply-To: <4B5DBED1.3050400@nosignal.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On 2010-01-26 04:54, Andy Davidson wrote: > On 25/01/2010 08:55, Vlad Ion wrote: >> I propose that the 6to4 ip conversion space from ipv4 addresses to >> 2002::ipv6 space will be redefined as provider independent address >> space. This way whoever wants to implement ipv6 with multi-homing can >> simply redefine their existing IPv4 addresses in IPv6 6to4 format and >> have multi-homing in ipv6. > > Sorry, this scares me. Well yes. Let's try a thought experiment that doesn't break 6to4: Proclaim that everyone who has a valid global IPv4 prefix owns the PI IPv6 prefix 4444:V4ADDR::/48. Then we have automatically imported all 318333 IPv4 prefixes (according to routeviews) into IPv6. I'm not quite sure how this would provide multihoming. Brian > It is not difficult to get IPv6 PI from the RIRs I have experience with. > > For example, in Europe, obtaining a single /48 IPv6 PI is a quick > process. Obtaining it in this way means that unused v4 is not recycled > as spoofable v6, and that organisations with tens of v4 unjoined > prefixes need not announced tens of unjoined v6 prefixes when they migrate. > > I commend you for thinking about ways to encourage networks to adopt v6, > but I think that education and advocacy is more future-proof than > migrating the v4 swap to v6. > > Andy > > From urn-nid-web-archivedd@ietf.org Mon Jan 25 14:40:06 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A64833A67ED for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:40:06 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:39:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from 168-191-231-201.fibertel.com.ar (168-191-231-201.fibertel.com.ar [201.231.191.168]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id DAE763A692D for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:39:42 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: You have a new personal message To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100125223948.DAE763A692D@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:39:42 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 33239 Inc. All rights reserved.

From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 25 14:42:37 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 064F13A692D for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:42:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.13 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.13 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.468, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XBACq3gqk38x for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:42:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A1DB3A68EF for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:42:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZXXX-0007l1-2w for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 22:36:11 +0000 Received: from [209.85.220.220] (helo=mail-fx0-f220.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZXXU-0007iw-3X for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 22:36:08 +0000 Received: by fxm20 with SMTP id 20so4155227fxm.1 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:36:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=D5FApZtCbfcclUa9I9pmNB4UonO8gXJCMNMrvd8161Q=; b=RgxULHQALwxOSQzyEf5N/rqnPHZCp5WYTCjTdSrqpAWVCsBv13OmLUFhvHzY6G/j8L M4Ej86AIuwRX0DORg+fPexrEXrI8K7XH5lGOEX7fB31f18tDd/2i2cst9SX8p6+eg7Pe fNnMibwg0u8YaV5AGTLUYkQ0OwsMvjW+WrCqo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=p/mlLFW1zE36gpjq7WM7oRaVvJ93zVBeXivc4hjYGrZmc84GMMKr3layEngPIqYf26 765STg7StixpHcVd7JFy4sesahFq1Vq4LWuCQhvctVZsMv79k9Zs7bnstO1ehf4DevuN 9S1fIrqD/6lcQntvbwRMa5UNF77h3JESRC4bs= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.102.206.30 with SMTP id d30mr3678047mug.99.1264458966805; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:36:06 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4B5E0E6C.6010502@gmail.com> References: <4B5DBED1.3050400@nosignal.org> <4B5E0E6C.6010502@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 00:36:06 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: IPv6 multihoming From: Vlad Ion To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org, shim6@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016364169658caea7047e04cbc7 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --0016364169658caea7047e04cbc7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 That would not provide multihoming as much as provide direct access to the whole internet in v6 format to anyone deciding to switch to v6 which would be a major incentive for a lot of end-users and enterprise clients instead of dealing with the few existing islands of v6 and running translation to reach the v4 internet. Also I doubt that its a valid statement to say that an organization receiving a /48 will still need to announce its smaller v4 blocks once it starts migrating the end customers to the /48 v6 range. I know several organization currently announcing a bunch of /24s and /22s in v4 which could easily be replaced by a single /48 in v6. BR, Vlad On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 11:34 PM, Brian E Carpenter < brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2010-01-26 04:54, Andy Davidson wrote: > > On 25/01/2010 08:55, Vlad Ion wrote: > >> I propose that the 6to4 ip conversion space from ipv4 addresses to > >> 2002::ipv6 space will be redefined as provider independent address > >> space. This way whoever wants to implement ipv6 with multi-homing can > >> simply redefine their existing IPv4 addresses in IPv6 6to4 format and > >> have multi-homing in ipv6. > > > > Sorry, this scares me. > > Well yes. Let's try a thought experiment that doesn't break 6to4: > > Proclaim that everyone who has a valid global IPv4 prefix owns > the PI IPv6 prefix 4444:V4ADDR::/48. > > Then we have automatically imported all 318333 IPv4 prefixes > (according to routeviews) into IPv6. > > I'm not quite sure how this would provide multihoming. > > Brian > > > > It is not difficult to get IPv6 PI from the RIRs I have experience with. > > > > For example, in Europe, obtaining a single /48 IPv6 PI is a quick > > process. Obtaining it in this way means that unused v4 is not recycled > > as spoofable v6, and that organisations with tens of v4 unjoined > > prefixes need not announced tens of unjoined v6 prefixes when they > migrate. > > > > I commend you for thinking about ways to encourage networks to adopt v6, > > but I think that education and advocacy is more future-proof than > > migrating the v4 swap to v6. > > > > Andy > > > > > > --0016364169658caea7047e04cbc7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable That would not provide multihoming as much as provide direct access to the = whole internet in v6 format to anyone deciding to switch to v6 which would = be a major incentive for a lot of end-users and enterprise clients instead = of dealing with the few existing islands of v6 and running translation to r= each the v4 internet. Also I doubt that its a valid statement to say that a= n organization receiving a /48 will still need to announce its smaller v4 b= locks once it starts migrating the end customers to the /48 v6 range. I kno= w several organization currently announcing a bunch of /24s and /22s in v4 = which could easily be replaced by a single /48 in v6.


BR,
Vlad

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 = at 11:34 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:<= br>
On 2010-01-26 04:54, Andy Davidson wrote:
> On 25/01/2010 08:55, Vlad Ion wrote:
>> I propose that the 6to4 ip conversion space from ipv4 addresses to=
>> 2002::ipv6 space will be redefined as provider independent address=
>> space. This way whoever wants to implement ipv6 with multi-homing = can
>> simply redefine their existing IPv4 addresses in IPv6 6to4 format = and
>> have multi-homing in ipv6.
>
> Sorry, this scares me.

Well yes. Let's try a thought experiment that doesn't break 6= to4:

Proclaim that everyone who has a valid global IPv4 prefix owns
the PI IPv6 prefix 4444:V4ADDR::/48.

Then we have automatically imported all 318333 IPv4 prefixes
(according to routeviews) into IPv6.

I'm not quite sure how this would provide multihoming.

=A0 =A0Brian


> It is not difficult to get IPv6 PI from the RIRs I have experience wit= h.
>
> For example, in Europe, obtaining a single /48 IPv6 PI is a quick
> process. =A0Obtaining it in this way means that unused v4 is not recyc= led
> as spoofable v6, and that organisations with tens of v4 unjoined
> prefixes need not announced tens of unjoined v6 prefixes when they mig= rate.
>
> I commend you for thinking about ways to encourage networks to adopt v= 6,
> but I think that education and advocacy is more future-proof than
> migrating the v4 swap to v6.
>
> Andy
>
>


--0016364169658caea7047e04cbc7-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Mon Jan 25 14:51:12 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 414FC3A692D for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:51:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NHAvP1wcz+3E for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:51:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62E103A63C9 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:51:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZXhv-0008sl-K7 for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 22:46:55 +0000 Received: from [209.85.160.42] (helo=mail-pw0-f42.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZXhn-0008s6-OV for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 22:46:48 +0000 Received: by pwi21 with SMTP id 21so2702488pwi.1 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:46:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=n0j6YlGJSv+5xYGh8YFwBvsKXaNvbNAHnOquIaBv24A=; b=csAwXt/uQGPtROzkkkAevmqMDFFUq/9In6REK7mX38o/QdeNMJaW0jJ/fhUiD2GUQW yCDFuLgquO7gdYj+FiQsAxAsJcRLoO8J8uC/SpEKJLo+l16kgv4CdvWraA8fulLeBepc 1V3ptpBCa/WYOy8UNM65v2cyEA0ywGwKJ8CLA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=pid1pFp7HznWapgbD1+1LumnoCv+IBsGW+o5KXWRlbLdlmtfCkSuArhiOkIzNurRca S4jPE4UEA0d5LzWeBNjFIu84cQ6okr9gz+wQWFtcFzCpUW6d74Jtggl2VX4CpP5yJDOC ZuQQmNzFajasWqNxpjTSa7bO+N/YedR8b8uSo= Received: by 10.143.21.36 with SMTP id y36mr4928898wfi.160.1264459607368; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:46:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?130.216.38.124? (stf-brian.sfac.auckland.ac.nz [130.216.38.124]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 21sm5276687pzk.15.2010.01.25.14.46.46 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:46:46 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B5E1F54.4070205@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:46:44 +1300 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vlad Ion CC: v6ops@ops.ietf.org Subject: Re: [shim6] IPv6 multihoming References: <4B5DBED1.3050400@nosignal.org> <4B5E0E6C.6010502@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Vlad, this is totally off-topic for shim6 so there is no value in cross-posting. The problem with IPv6 deployment is nothing to do with getting address space. It's to do with the reluctance of ISPs, site managers, and their various vendors to spend resources on this. This is changing now that IPv4 address exhaustion is imminent and they are beginning to see a financial argument. Regards Brian Carpenter On 2010-01-26 11:36, Vlad Ion wrote: > That would not provide multihoming as much as provide direct access to the > whole internet in v6 format to anyone deciding to switch to v6 which would > be a major incentive for a lot of end-users and enterprise clients instead > of dealing with the few existing islands of v6 and running translation to > reach the v4 internet. Also I doubt that its a valid statement to say that > an organization receiving a /48 will still need to announce its smaller v4 > blocks once it starts migrating the end customers to the /48 v6 range. I > know several organization currently announcing a bunch of /24s and /22s in > v4 which could easily be replaced by a single /48 in v6. > > > BR, > Vlad > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 11:34 PM, Brian E Carpenter < > brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 2010-01-26 04:54, Andy Davidson wrote: >>> On 25/01/2010 08:55, Vlad Ion wrote: >>>> I propose that the 6to4 ip conversion space from ipv4 addresses to >>>> 2002::ipv6 space will be redefined as provider independent address >>>> space. This way whoever wants to implement ipv6 with multi-homing can >>>> simply redefine their existing IPv4 addresses in IPv6 6to4 format and >>>> have multi-homing in ipv6. >>> Sorry, this scares me. >> Well yes. Let's try a thought experiment that doesn't break 6to4: >> >> Proclaim that everyone who has a valid global IPv4 prefix owns >> the PI IPv6 prefix 4444:V4ADDR::/48. >> >> Then we have automatically imported all 318333 IPv4 prefixes >> (according to routeviews) into IPv6. >> >> I'm not quite sure how this would provide multihoming. >> >> Brian >> >> >>> It is not difficult to get IPv6 PI from the RIRs I have experience with. >>> >>> For example, in Europe, obtaining a single /48 IPv6 PI is a quick >>> process. Obtaining it in this way means that unused v4 is not recycled >>> as spoofable v6, and that organisations with tens of v4 unjoined >>> prefixes need not announced tens of unjoined v6 prefixes when they >> migrate. >>> I commend you for thinking about ways to encourage networks to adopt v6, >>> but I think that education and advocacy is more future-proof than >>> migrating the v4 swap to v6. >>> >>> Andy >>> >>> >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > shim6 mailing list > shim6@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/shim6 From smf-discussion@lists.ietf.org Mon Jan 25 16:44:28 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2068B3A676A for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:44:28 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: <58IsrKUeRAro> X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:44:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from 190-82-199-185.adsl.tie.cl (190-82-199-185.adsl.tie.cl [190.82.199.185]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id DD7CF3A677C for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:44:14 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: Special Ticket Receipt To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100126004420.DD7CF3A677C@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:44:14 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 96669 Inc. All rights reserved.

From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Mon Jan 25 17:34:18 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B49D03A6781 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 17:34:18 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 17:34:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from agrimarket.fi (unknown [190.159.87.74]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id D90223A67D8 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 17:34:10 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: You Must Know About This Promotion To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100126013410.D90223A67D8@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 17:34:10 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 85749 Inc. All rights reserved.

From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 26 02:37:21 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87CDE3A68E4 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 02:37:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vFFfh8qjD1ru for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 02:37:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D10203A63EC for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 02:37:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZifd-0000D3-EY for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:29:17 +0000 Received: from [2a02:c30:20:1:230:5ff:fe4c:5c42] (helo=shaniqua.netsumo.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZifb-0000CG-3Z for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:29:15 +0000 Received: from [2a02:c30:20:1:648f:b3bd:5071:d472] by shaniqua.netsumo.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NZifX-0008Md-3N; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:29:11 +0000 Message-ID: <4B5EC3F3.9020508@nosignal.org> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:29:07 +0000 From: Andy Davidson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 Thunderbird/3.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vlad Ion CC: v6ops@ops.ietf.org Subject: Re: IPv6 multihoming References: <4B5DBED1.3050400@nosignal.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On 25/01/2010 19:44, Vlad Ion wrote: > I do agree that organizations with scattered v4 blocks should announce a > larger v6 block instead of several small ones and that's why I think the > RIRs should provide all organizations currently having v4 space with > free v6 blocks Hi, I disagree that "anyone with IPv4 should be automatically assigned IPv6" because this will encourage deaggregation. Further, assigning space to people who don't know what to do with it (and perhaps do not need address resources any more at all) leaves us in a worse situation than today. Besides, this is an addressing policy question and is best taken up with the community based around the RIR in your region, where great thinkers on this particular topic will absolutely want to discuss this suggestion with you ! Andy From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 26 04:18:46 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45E283A690B for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 04:18:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.244 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.244 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FRT_BELOW2=2.154, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_54=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4NylehYs2PLS for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 04:18:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9CA83A6900 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 04:18:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZkHa-000EqN-UX for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 12:12:34 +0000 Received: from [65.55.34.21] (helo=col0-omc1-s11.col0.hotmail.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZkHX-000EpN-Th for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 12:12:31 +0000 Received: from COL114-W19 ([65.55.34.8]) by col0-omc1-s11.col0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 26 Jan 2010 04:12:31 -0800 Message-ID: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_79a623f5-684c-46c7-ba11-5583150f8e1c_" X-Originating-IP: [203.217.71.148] From: Greg Daley To: , Subject: RE: IPv6 multihoming Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 23:12:31 +1100 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Jan 2010 12:12:31.0635 (UTC) FILETIME=[D5F90630:01CA9E80] Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --_79a623f5-684c-46c7-ba11-5583150f8e1c_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable (To v6ops only). I think that there are three distinct issues: 1. Source address selection for outbound communications=2C 2. Path specification and robustness for inbound communications (which subs= umes destination address selection and routing specification) 3. Source address and path independent communications. For each of these: 1: is well described in RFC5220 3: is being handled by SHIM6 and similar approaches=2C but aren't strictly = required for multihoming (but are interesting nevertheless). 2: can be handled either by specification of the routing path or destinatio= n address. The current APNIC(pick a NIC) etc rules which allow provider independent IP= v6 address allocations to existing IPv4 MH customers seem sensible enough for = the early adopters who already have the BGP policy nous to manage the routing. Proliferation of Provider Independent addressing is problematic though=2C i= n that there's the potential for unrestricted growth in the routing table (this was proble= matic before when memory was expensive and helped motivate the IPv6 architecture=2C but = we have a potentially much larger Internet in the future=2C and we do not know how = things will develop).=20 I prefer that the ultimate solution doesn't require every multihomed PAN to= have a PI prefix (for example). I am interested in exploring other mechanisms=2C like DNS based specificati= on of service addresses (with failover and load balancing policies). This provides multi= ple destination addresses=2C but leaves backbone routing largely to the core ISPs=2C but le= aves the specification of how services are reachable to the content provider (where arguably it be= longs). An initial experimental approach which attempts this is shown in:=20 http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-daley-dnsext-host-srv-00.txt Sorry to tootle my own trumpet=2C but hey =3B) Greg Date: Mon=2C 25 Jan 2010 10:55:42 +0200 Subject: IPv6 multihoming From: vlad.thoth@gmail.com To: shim6@ietf.org=3B v6ops@ops.ietf.org Hi=2C For a year now whenever it comes to IPv6 telco implementations I keep facin= g 2 problems so I was hoping you can guide me towards find a group that dea= ls with these issues or discussion solutions. The 2 problems are related to= IPv6 multi-homing and access to the internet in IPv6 format for a quick tr= ansitions from v4 to v6. Also I need some guidance as to what needs to be d= one for a draft document proposal to be created about the proposed solution= s mentioned bellow and who needs to be involved in this process.=20 As far as multi-homing goes in IPv6 the solution discussion generated by us= ing provider-independent address space like mentioned in draft-hain-ipv6-pi= -addr-10 seems too complicated to implement efficiently and generates a lot= of unnecessary work. Because IPv6 will never really be adopted by ISPs=2C = telco and enterprises until it offers a feasible multi-homing solution my p= roposal is that some solutions are redefined such as provider independent a= ddress space and the 6to4 standard. I propose that the 6to4 ip conversion space from ipv4 addresses to 2002::ip= v6 space will be redefined as provider independent address space. This way = whoever wants to implement ipv6 with multi-homing can simply redefine their= existing IPv4 addresses in IPv6 6to4 format and have multi-homing in ipv6.= Everyone already uses ipv4 multi-homing with success so I see no point in = defining a new addressing system for v6 when everyone can simply use the sa= me v4 address space for multi-homing but converted in 6to4 format. Also=2C another issue faced by whoever uses IPv6 is that access to the inte= rnet in v6 format is limited so a proposal has to be made to the RIRs to of= fer incentives such as free IPv6 space for anyone who implements 6to4 relay= routers and advertises their existing v4 space in v6 format along with the= newly received free v6 space. I believe that as long as ietf gets involved and a rfc is written on these = 2 proposals starting with the redefining of the provider independent addre= ss space and its inclusion in the 6to4 format things will be a lot more com= pact and give some additional momentum to the IPv6 migration process. Best regards and I hope to hear from you soon=2C Vlad Ion Siemens PSE IP backbone design engineer =20 _________________________________________________________________ View photos of singles in your area! Browse profiles for FREE http://clk.atdmt.com/NMN/go/150855801/direct/01/= --_79a623f5-684c-46c7-ba11-5583150f8e1c_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable (To v6ops only).

I think that there are three distinct issues:
1. Source address selection for outbound communications=2C

2. Path= specification and robustness for inbound communications (which subsumesdestination address selection and routing specification)

3. Source = address and path independent communications.

For each of these:
<= br>1: is well described in RFC5220

3: is being handled by SHIM6 and = similar approaches=2C but aren't strictly required for
multihoming (but = are interesting nevertheless).

2: can be handled either by specifica= tion of the routing path or destination address.

The current APNIC(p= ick a NIC) etc rules which allow provider independent IPv6
address alloc= ations to existing IPv4 MH customers seem sensible enough for the early
= adopters who already have the BGP policy nous to manage the routing.
Proliferation of Provider Independent addressing is problematic though=2C = in that there's
the potential for unrestricted growth in the routing tab= le (this was problematic before
when memory was expensive and helped mot= ivate the IPv6 architecture=2C but we have
a potentially much larger Int= ernet in the future=2C and we do not know how things will develop).
I p= refer that the ultimate solution doesn't require every multihomed PAN to ha= ve a PI
prefix (for example).

I am interested in exploring other = mechanisms=2C like DNS based specification of service
addresses (with fa= ilover and load balancing policies). =3B This provides multiple destina= tion
addresses=2C but leaves backbone routing largely to the core ISPs= =2C but leaves the specification
of how services are reachable to the co= ntent provider (where arguably it belongs).

An initial experimental = approach which attempts this is shown in:

http://www.ietf.org/id/dr= aft-daley-dnsext-host-srv-00.txt

Sorry to tootle my own trumpet=2C b= ut hey =3B)

Greg


Date: Mon=2C 25 = Jan 2010 10:55:42 +0200
Subject: IPv6 multihoming
From: vlad.thoth@gm= ail.com
To: shim6@ietf.org=3B v6ops@ops.ietf.org

Hi=2C

For= a year now whenever it comes to IPv6 telco implementations I keep facing 2= problems so I was hoping you can guide me towards find a group that deals = with these issues or discussion solutions. The 2 problems are related to IP= v6 multi-homing and access to the internet in IPv6 format for a quick trans= itions from v4 to v6. Also I need some guidance as to what needs to be done= for a draft document proposal to be created about the proposed solutions m= entioned bellow and who needs to be involved in this process.

As far as multi-homing goes in IPv6 the solution discussion generated b= y using provider-independent address space like mentioned in draft-hain-ipv= 6-pi-addr-10 seems too complicated to implement efficiently and generates a= lot of unnecessary work. Because IPv6 will never really be adopted by ISPs= =2C telco and enterprises until it offers a feasible multi-homing solution = my proposal is that some solutions are redefined such as provider independe= nt address space and the 6to4 standard.

I propose that the 6to4 ip conversion space from ipv4 addresses to 2002= ::ipv6 space will be redefined as provider independent address space. This = way whoever wants to implement ipv6 with multi-homing can simply redefine t= heir existing IPv4 addresses in IPv6 6to4 format and have multi-homing in i= pv6. Everyone already uses ipv4 multi-homing with success so I see no point= in defining a new addressing system for v6 when everyone can simply use th= e same v4 address space for multi-homing but converted in 6to4 format.

Also=2C another issue faced by whoever uses IPv6 is that access to the = internet in v6 format is limited so a proposal has to be made to the RIRs t= o offer incentives such as free IPv6 space for anyone who implements 6to4 r= elay routers and advertises their existing v4 space in v6 format along with= the newly received free v6 space.

I believe that as long as ietf gets involved and a rfc is written on th= ese 2 proposals starting with the redefining of =3B the provider indepe= ndent address space and its inclusion in the 6to4 format things will be a l= ot more compact and give some additional momentum to the IPv6 migration pro= cess.

Best regards and I hope to hear from you soon=2C
Vlad Ion

Sie= mens PSE
IP backbone design engineer

Browse p= rofiles for FREE View photos of singles in your area! = --_79a623f5-684c-46c7-ba11-5583150f8e1c_-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 26 07:00:43 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF7C93A67B6 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 07:00:43 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4bzbX1p+UB+R for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 07:00:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 689823A67A1 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 07:00:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZmn0-000IUC-Tb for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 14:53:10 +0000 Received: from [2001:608:0:1::100] (helo=moebius2.Space.Net) by psg.com with smtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZmmp-000IOa-7x for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 14:52:59 +0000 Received: (qmail 18579 invoked by uid 1007); 26 Jan 2010 14:52:57 -0000 Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=testkey; d=space.net; b=XYLs1QsH/4x105gixafnvFxqBWPdd0Y3HkfzJznp2++UJclnhBox/NeUnuTFTngR ; Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 15:52:57 +0100 From: Gert Doering To: Vlad Ion Cc: v6ops@ops.ietf.org, shim6@ietf.org Subject: Re: IPv6 multihoming Message-ID: <20100126145257.GD32226@Space.Net> References: <4B5DBED1.3050400@nosignal.org> <4B5E0E6C.6010502@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-NCC-RegID: de.space Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hi, On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 12:36:06AM +0200, Vlad Ion wrote: > That would not provide multihoming as much as provide direct access to the > whole internet in v6 format to anyone deciding to switch to v6 which would I'm very interested in learning how this new way of looking at 2002:: address space is going to magically turn on IPv6 configuration in all the web servers, firewalls, and load balancers out there? The problem today is not "acquire IPv6 address space" but "encourage people to actually turn it *on* on their servers and networking gear". Gert Doering -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 144438 SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 26 09:28:13 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FAEF3A67DB for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:28:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.037 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.037 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.407, BAYES_00=-2.599, FRT_BELOW2=2.154, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aOid7MrGSzEM for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:28:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2830A3A67CC for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:28:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZp61-000Jrg-LO for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 17:20:57 +0000 Received: from [209.85.211.193] (helo=mail-yw0-f193.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZp5z-000Jr1-AL for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 17:20:55 +0000 Received: by ywh31 with SMTP id 31so3988386ywh.32 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:20:54 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=Rrc9EXUKxRXsQQqWhfN2ZcnIQJQiSc5Togr0h5tcxbU=; b=lbK6RByjObtihG2qpDYNdwKUBLuaaIAPM3jYyu9YTNHH16lbIl/UbmMM8SeQaLZoea eiqrbD3rM7uyXmiOTyzKDe5r+aInCr7m450gX/bfJ9hsDRemnSQGj2ABN5Wye1xzjoi9 pBHsyqnFNC3jti9LEmTFlG4KQKnhjRCmbX0TU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=V+eQcQxN549ZUlpHMsWYD7YNKxlyRiGy12vpKpPlJoaB1G9LtsYhPAazcE037n/Wso 40JSp73gk2rxPyb+ozHcw2Vr1nUy1rL581BYLiY1jMJx1guWJPxk16z5b6BaLTS7pefm 2RGjFszH2IXybnSnYhrfP5cFwqsiRouov2eJc= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.103.87.28 with SMTP id p28mr4198341mul.83.1264526453249; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:20:53 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <8582c31a1001260806w4b62cc50wf887a8f87a9a7700@mail.gmail.com> References: <8582c31a1001260806w4b62cc50wf887a8f87a9a7700@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 19:20:53 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: IPv6 multihoming From: Vlad Ion To: shim6@ietf.org, v6ops@ops.ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e65c7f680e18db047e14823c Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --0016e65c7f680e18db047e14823c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi Ethern, The idea of having people who own v4 space to announce it in v6 form and perform the local translation between those 2 was to encourage and provide an additional incentive to whoever deploys a v6 island because they'll have direct access to the full internet in v6 form without needing to deploy something like 6to4 to access the v6 internet and a nat-pt to access the v4 internet. BR, Vlad On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 6:06 PM, Ethern M., Lin wrote: > Hi Vlad, > > This issue is assuming that everyone can get the public IPv4 IP, > right? But how can you guarantee that everyone can get the public IPv4 > IP without any problem? If not, I don't think your idea work although > I am admire your spirit to push IPv6 and solve the multi-homing issue > in IPv6. > > cheers, > Ethern > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 4:55 PM, Vlad Ion wrote: > > Hi, > > > > For a year now whenever it comes to IPv6 telco implementations I keep > facing > > 2 problems so I was hoping you can guide me towards find a group that > deals > > with these issues or discussion solutions. The 2 problems are related to > > IPv6 multi-homing and access to the internet in IPv6 format for a quick > > transitions from v4 to v6. Also I need some guidance as to what needs to > be > > done for a draft document proposal to be created about the proposed > > solutions mentioned bellow and who needs to be involved in this process. > > > > As far as multi-homing goes in IPv6 the solution discussion generated by > > using provider-independent address space like mentioned in > > draft-hain-ipv6-pi-addr-10 seems too complicated to implement efficiently > > and generates a lot of unnecessary work. Because IPv6 will never really > be > > adopted by ISPs, telco and enterprises until it offers a feasible > > multi-homing solution my proposal is that some solutions are redefined > such > > as provider independent address space and the 6to4 standard. > > > > I propose that the 6to4 ip conversion space from ipv4 addresses to > > 2002::ipv6 space will be redefined as provider independent address space. > > This way whoever wants to implement ipv6 with multi-homing can simply > > redefine their existing IPv4 addresses in IPv6 6to4 format and have > > multi-homing in ipv6. Everyone already uses ipv4 multi-homing with > success > > so I see no point in defining a new addressing system for v6 when > everyone > > can simply use the same v4 address space for multi-homing but converted > in > > 6to4 format. > > > > Also, another issue faced by whoever uses IPv6 is that access to the > > internet in v6 format is limited so a proposal has to be made to the RIRs > to > > offer incentives such as free IPv6 space for anyone who implements 6to4 > > relay routers and advertises their existing v4 space in v6 format along > with > > the newly received free v6 space. > > > > I believe that as long as ietf gets involved and a rfc is written on > these 2 > > proposals starting with the redefining of the provider independent > address > > space and its inclusion in the 6to4 format things will be a lot more > compact > > and give some additional momentum to the IPv6 migration process. > > > > Best regards and I hope to hear from you soon, > > Vlad Ion > > > > Siemens PSE > > IP backbone design engineer > > > --0016e65c7f680e18db047e14823c Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Ethern,

The idea of having people who own v4 space to announce it= in v6 form and perform the local translation between those 2 was to encour= age and provide an additional incentive to whoever deploys a v6 island beca= use they'll have direct access to the full internet in v6 form without = needing to deploy something like 6to4 to access the v6 internet and a nat-p= t to access the v4 internet.

BR,
Vlad

On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 6= :06 PM, Ethern M., Lin <ethern@ascc.net> wrote:
Hi Vlad,

This issue is assuming that everyone can get the public IPv4 IP,
right? But how can you guarantee that everyone can get the public IPv4
IP without any problem? If not, I don't think your idea work although I am admire your spirit to push IPv6 and solve the multi-homing issue
in IPv6.

cheers,
Ethern

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 4:55 PM, Vlad Ion <vlad.thoth@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For a year now whenever it comes to IPv6 telco implementations I keep = facing
> 2 problems so I was hoping you can guide me towards find a group that = deals
> with these issues or discussion solutions. The 2 problems are related = to
> IPv6 multi-homing and access to the internet in IPv6 format for a quic= k
> transitions from v4 to v6. Also I need some guidance as to what needs = to be
> done for a draft document proposal to be created about the proposed > solutions mentioned bellow and who needs to be involved in this proces= s.
>
> As far as multi-homing goes in IPv6 the solution discussion generated = by
> using provider-independent address space like mentioned in
> draft-hain-ipv6-pi-addr-10 seems too complicated to implement efficien= tly
> and generates a lot of unnecessary work. Because IPv6 will never reall= y be
> adopted by ISPs, telco and enterprises until it offers a feasible
> multi-homing solution my proposal is that some solutions are redefined= such
> as provider independent address space and the 6to4 standard.
>
> I propose that the 6to4 ip conversion space from ipv4 addresses to
> 2002::ipv6 space will be redefined as provider independent address spa= ce.
> This way whoever wants to implement ipv6 with multi-homing can simply<= br> > redefine their existing IPv4 addresses in IPv6 6to4 format and have > multi-homing in ipv6. Everyone already uses ipv4 multi-homing with suc= cess
> so I see no point in defining a new addressing system for v6 when ever= yone
> can simply use the same v4 address space for multi-homing but converte= d in
> 6to4 format.
>
> Also, another issue faced by whoever uses IPv6 is that access to the > internet in v6 format is limited so a proposal has to be made to the R= IRs to
> offer incentives such as free IPv6 space for anyone who implements 6to= 4
> relay routers and advertises their existing v4 space in v6 format alon= g with
> the newly received free v6 space.
>
> I believe that as long as ietf gets involved and a rfc is written on t= hese 2
> proposals starting with the redefining of=A0 the provider independent = address
> space and its inclusion in the 6to4 format things will be a lot more c= ompact
> and give some additional momentum to the IPv6 migration process.
>
> Best regards and I hope to hear from you soon,
> Vlad Ion
>
> Siemens PSE
> IP backbone design engineer
>

--0016e65c7f680e18db047e14823c-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 26 09:32:01 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEE313A67F4 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:32:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.155 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.155 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.443, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6V1Gu7gRzWIu for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:32:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E64D03A67CC for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:32:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZpEO-000LCH-Sl for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 17:29:36 +0000 Received: from [209.85.210.194] (helo=mail-yx0-f194.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZpEM-000LBo-JL for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 17:29:34 +0000 Received: by yxe32 with SMTP id 32so9564216yxe.5 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:29:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=17+5ISIzYASxAcSZFO2/JP3vgrw0urV9euqbV5X+hvQ=; b=D2snLYjWfn+eQjjcAKMK/LFSVlGn6VTCjRVb6NQQ9xRuycZDglUXCtfQbnxIruMwDi rnSMVYsXOjRo4AkHP1GlEJZcpYqOesR6cRf4KJYAzlfnppr5YIzd5xF+Ls5jApuxdROU CHP3qvK180m0b//PsSv1nhQeVdvWlPpzSNysE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=dGvVceKykXlb7sRwHQxWrY8cbv2Q1qt1dMPD9FpF91odeE3UTP8cJjpbuNtCifPag/ xtW8CbF8U/lMIFnGVM4hDWXGEMXezjPI5H6wlVlzBzno2AZgO9JOM9JNbrkemeRP1hHz 1EINTq6/HI+DVjOLl55H683VQ3sO0uaBFgnAA= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.102.160.15 with SMTP id i15mr4192003mue.131.1264526973202; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:29:33 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20100126145257.GD32226@Space.Net> References: <4B5DBED1.3050400@nosignal.org> <4B5E0E6C.6010502@gmail.com> <20100126145257.GD32226@Space.Net> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 19:29:33 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: IPv6 multihoming From: Vlad Ion To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org, shim6@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016364d29d10bf1e9047e14a1b0 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --0016364d29d10bf1e9047e14a1b0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi Gert, The idea was that people should only need to switch v6 on have have it run and not need to deploy 6to4, for example to access the v6 internet and in addition to that something like nat-pt to access the v4 internet. My thinking was that if you can access the v4 internet in v6 form, translated by those that own each address block or at least most prefixes, it would be a lot more stimulating for everyone else to switch on your v6 address which you would simply obtain by converting your existing v4 to a 2002:: just as an example, or ask for a PI/PA space and have it run with minimum effort. BR, Vlad On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Gert Doering wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 12:36:06AM +0200, Vlad Ion wrote: > > That would not provide multihoming as much as provide direct access to > the > > whole internet in v6 format to anyone deciding to switch to v6 which > would > > I'm very interested in learning how this new way of looking at 2002:: > address space is going to magically turn on IPv6 configuration in all > the web servers, firewalls, and load balancers out there? > > The problem today is not "acquire IPv6 address space" but "encourage > people to actually turn it *on* on their servers and networking gear". > > Gert Doering > -- > Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 144438 > > SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard > Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann > D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) > Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 > --0016364d29d10bf1e9047e14a1b0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Gert,

The idea was that people should only need to switch v6 on h= ave have it run and not need to deploy 6to4, for example to access the v6 i= nternet and in addition to that something like nat-pt to access the v4 inte= rnet. My thinking was that if you can access the v4 internet in v6 form, tr= anslated by those that own each address block or at least most prefixes, it= would be a lot more stimulating for everyone else to switch on your v6 add= ress which you would simply obtain by converting your existing v4 to a 2002= :: just as an example, or ask for a PI/PA space and have it run with minimu= m effort.

BR,
Vlad

On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 4= :52 PM, Gert Doering <gert@space.net> wrote:
Hi,

On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 12:36:06AM +0200, Vlad Ion wrote:
> That would not provide multihoming as much as provide direct access to= the
> whole internet in v6 format to anyone deciding to switch to v6 which w= ould

I'm very interested in learning how this new way of looking at 20= 02::
address space is going to magically turn on IPv6 configuration in all
the web servers, firewalls, and load balancers out there?

The problem today is not "acquire IPv6 address space" but "e= ncourage
people to actually turn it *on* on their servers and networking gear".=

Gert Doering
--
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: =A0144438

SpaceNet AG =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Vorstand: Sebast= ian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundne= r-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 HRB: 136055 (AG Muench= en)
Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

--0016364d29d10bf1e9047e14a1b0-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 26 10:20:26 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 981003A697A for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:20:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bZ07Ra2OUjMd for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:20:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A8473A6823 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:20:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZpwA-0003FL-KR for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 18:14:50 +0000 Received: from [2a02:c30:20:1:230:5ff:fe4c:5c42] (helo=shaniqua.netsumo.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZpw8-0003Eq-29 for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 18:14:48 +0000 Received: from [2a02:c30:20:1:496:615c:9d36:e0c5] by shaniqua.netsumo.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NZpw6-0000l2-ES; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 18:14:46 +0000 Message-ID: <4B5F3110.5030708@nosignal.org> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 18:14:40 +0000 From: Andy Davidson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 Thunderbird/3.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vlad Ion , v6ops@ops.ietf.org Subject: Re: IPv6 multihoming References: <4B5DBED1.3050400@nosignal.org> <4B5E0E6C.6010502@gmail.com> <20100126145257.GD32226@Space.Net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On 26/01/2010 17:29, Vlad Ion wrote: > The idea was that people should only need to switch v6 on Hi, This really is easy enough already. The problem is that people are not turning it on, not that access to numbers is difficult. Andy From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 26 11:05:07 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31A5B3A6998 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:05:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.448 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.448 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oYxtTs7nL6bO for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:05:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D37173A6985 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:05:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZqcy-000BHJ-H2 for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 18:59:04 +0000 Received: from [216.239.58.191] (helo=gv-out-0910.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZqcv-000BGK-FP for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 18:59:01 +0000 Received: by gv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id r4so355994gve.2 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:59:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=4HKdmBHchpv6IJ1Z38W92gHLYgk6iADmnBura3vng8c=; b=esny6Isd/99ZxN9vH8bIHsC4dTy9Qv1LFXChojqAcNrfdOQP7y00uzxjsGE+Hclw17 psPIwBebk+Vvq8g6SqoessaPlxbUpemgvSgQzhV1CkkOCwZ4IK2ZA4w4fGlZnWUHYcDY my13cXx+Lzc2ZQf4OgsvSgbym47qdINEFRG+Y= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=ASfDO/we1UCJIfr9ZhmJEGVcKLcLog9CWPfQjqF5JKXwKa/Lhx2tSb6f6JZcCATn9/ PGHv9CaU6Zy6cJMkxsUF4xjOzEYagddxeF5P2AcKXCJxOpEYnp70H+4eZMyJU+1sjETn 8MxsjR/9hhGyXSE/kQyTl3s8mkNOwtLYUDPos= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.102.16.13 with SMTP id 13mr4250214mup.62.1264532339638; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:58:59 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4B5F3110.5030708@nosignal.org> References: <4B5DBED1.3050400@nosignal.org> <4B5E0E6C.6010502@gmail.com> <20100126145257.GD32226@Space.Net> <4B5F3110.5030708@nosignal.org> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 20:58:58 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: IPv6 multihoming From: Vlad Ion To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016364995afe96651047e15e0d9 Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --0016364995afe96651047e15e0d9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi, Unfortunately it is not as easy as just turning it on like in the case of IPv4 where you set your ip and that's it - you have access to the internet. If you set v6 instead of v4 on a server you get access to people in the v6 and 6to4 by having a 6to4 relay but then you need nat-pt for v4 connectivity. or I may be mistaking but that was the case with the servers I set v6 on till now. BR, Vlad On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 8:14 PM, Andy Davidson wrote: > On 26/01/2010 17:29, Vlad Ion wrote: > > The idea was that people should only need to switch v6 on > > Hi, > > This really is easy enough already. > > The problem is that people are not turning it on, not that access to > numbers is difficult. > > Andy > --0016364995afe96651047e15e0d9 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi,

Unfortunately it is not as easy as just turning it on like in th= e case of IPv4 where you set your ip and that's it - you have access to= the internet. If you set v6 instead of v4 on a server you get access to pe= ople in the v6 and 6to4 by having a 6to4 relay but then you need nat-pt for= v4 connectivity. or I may be mistaking but that was the case with the serv= ers I set v6 on till now.

BR,
Vlad

On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 8= :14 PM, Andy Davidson <andy@nosignal.org> wrote:
On 26/01/2010 17:29, Vlad Ion wrote:
> The idea was that people should only need to switch v6 on

Hi,

This really is easy enough already.

The problem is that people are not turning it on, not that access to
numbers is difficult.

Andy

--0016364995afe96651047e15e0d9-- From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 26 11:39:20 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D1AD3A69A0 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:39:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L6yry3Mt8TPy for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:39:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 468013A6999 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:39:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZrCL-000Hjg-Eg for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 19:35:37 +0000 Received: from [72.14.220.154] (helo=fg-out-1718.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NZrCI-000Hj8-SR for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 19:35:35 +0000 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 22so37611fge.17 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:35:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=4LNZVrzZ0VXv5dWFe35q3fdZezqnT/JFwX0h0koTm4E=; b=wySS75mqbbrpKJFwaT4eAXQRqhv9H5CAgGXLL6v7TLZkggoQna1KoWdrm2yIuv669R HHmT30Q2p24YR0cEtXtjRftSvZcxBzl/5xhwhqIX+8GE0V92AxrvAZLTkeFvb8AdhjzK ktitqID1USI+1TG7FakwBWVFAvT5RTMS8gaRM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=gDxo6XXKcF+MNvZuXSNxC/DxdJNN07HWI4GKfzRms/KZXGuo+WAg0T1VulHPn0UQHn WSTAIibhNfWfnY6Kug+MmdburyU+JpOZc3teEsDW39xvBy+xXZ4Me4ojw/ins3CJOxxx CSxwJIltzwxC8Kn7WnFlhcDWYIc1+rKPh/ui8= Received: by 10.87.61.5 with SMTP id o5mr13561323fgk.79.1264534533181; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:35:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?10.1.1.4? ([121.98.142.15]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 12sm14383562fgg.7.2010.01.26.11.35.30 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:35:32 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B5F43FC.60900@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 08:35:24 +1300 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vlad Ion CC: v6ops@ops.ietf.org Subject: Re: IPv6 multihoming References: <4B5DBED1.3050400@nosignal.org> <4B5E0E6C.6010502@gmail.com> <20100126145257.GD32226@Space.Net> <4B5F3110.5030708@nosignal.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Vlad, I suggest that you study the current work in SOFTWIRE, BEHAVE, the RRG, and LISP. These are not new problems, and as several people have said, getting an IPv6 prefix (whether PI or PA) is the least of our problems. Regards Brian Carpenter On 2010-01-27 07:58, Vlad Ion wrote: > Hi, > > Unfortunately it is not as easy as just turning it on like in the case of > IPv4 where you set your ip and that's it - you have access to the internet. > If you set v6 instead of v4 on a server you get access to people in the v6 > and 6to4 by having a 6to4 relay but then you need nat-pt for v4 > connectivity. or I may be mistaking but that was the case with the servers I > set v6 on till now. > > BR, > Vlad > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 8:14 PM, Andy Davidson wrote: > >> On 26/01/2010 17:29, Vlad Ion wrote: >>> The idea was that people should only need to switch v6 on >> Hi, >> >> This really is easy enough already. >> >> The problem is that people are not turning it on, not that access to >> numbers is difficult. >> >> Andy >> > From secmech-request@lists.ietf.org Tue Jan 26 11:47:35 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7238E28C0FB for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:47:35 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:47:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from pc-24-124-44-190.cm.vtr.net (pc-24-124-44-190.cm.vtr.net [190.44.124.24]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B25643A69A8 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:47:19 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: Electronic Discount Code 78% for v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100126194726.B25643A69A8@core3.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:47:19 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 81229 Inc. All rights reserved.

From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Tue Jan 26 23:47:41 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3C673A6852 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 23:47:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uD3NFBpZ31vQ for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 23:47:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1902C3A6820 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 23:47:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1Na2Um-0007dj-Gx for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 07:39:24 +0000 Received: from [2002:d9a0:db4b:1::9] (helo=p15139323.pureserver.info) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1Na2Uk-0007dI-8y for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 07:39:22 +0000 Received: from p5ddaad2f.dip.t-dialin.net ([93.218.173.47] helo=zaphod.lan.local) by p15139323.pureserver.info with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Na2Ug-00056h-Rj; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 08:39:18 +0100 From: Konrad Rosenbaum To: Vlad Ion , v6ops@ops.ietf.org Subject: Re: IPv6 multihoming Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 08:39:13 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 References: <4B5F3110.5030708@nosignal.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1328669.LLPUAKSDbD"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201001270839.17082@zaphod.konrad.silmor.de> Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --nextPart1328669.LLPUAKSDbD Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Hi, On Tuesday 26 January 2010, Vlad Ion wrote: > Unfortunately it is not as easy as just turning it on like in the case of > IPv4 where you set your ip and that's it - you have access to the > internet. If you set v6 instead of v4 on a server you get access to > people in the v6 and 6to4 by having a 6to4 relay but then you need nat-pt > for v4 > connectivity. or I may be mistaking but that was the case with the > servers I set v6 on till now. grantedly I come from a SOHO (customer side) background, but I don't really= =20 see where the difficulty is. What I normally do with networks that I switch to v6 is this: 0a) Leave IPv4 the hell alone! It works. Don't fix it. Don't even think=20 about taking it away from the admins! They would eat you for lunch (or=20 sooner). 0b) Don't plan for production use immediately. Plan for a transition phase= =20 of at least 6 months. This gives you time to explore your options. 1) switch v6 on (configure routers, there are easy HOWTOs) 2) add v6 to DNS and some other services (over time) 3) relax, your main job is done, most hosts will switch it on magically. The actual work time for this is very little. And you'll have a working=20 dual-stack environment afterwards. Now you can start to transition=20 applications one by one over a longer period of time. There are a couple of other things you can think about while the test and=20 transition phases are still running - like unportable applications, address= =20 stability or renumbering after a provider switch, DHCP-PD, a final v6-only= =20 network in 2015 or maybe 2020, etc. There is really no need to disrupt the network or the global addressing=20 architecture just because someone wants to replicate the old v4 work=20 instructions on a v6 network - there is time enough to explore and create=20 new instructions while the network already works in test mode. Konrad --nextPart1328669.LLPUAKSDbD Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAktf7aIACgkQyxXJkXI6YgDJ+gCeOOEHSfm/RskyD69meer23rc7 IBcAn28XoAy+qAl98n5n2cFyTtWEm0dA =eN/b -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1328669.LLPUAKSDbD-- From secmech-request@lists.ietf.org Wed Jan 27 07:40:49 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 992443A6840 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 07:40:49 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 07:40:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from aispace.net (unknown [186.81.148.186]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 888613A6950 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 07:40:34 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: Sales Event get 76% off To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100127154041.888613A6950@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 07:40:34 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 72411 Inc. All rights reserved.

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Wed Jan 27 07:56:53 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A3553A6837 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 07:56:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -87.519 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-87.519 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_60=1, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_NONE=0.1, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id H5cbz6ejAH7Y for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 07:56:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from noor.ddns.easy-lan.net (unknown [213.240.222.17]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 343A83A681A for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 07:56:51 -0800 (PST) From: Alexandra To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Come to me, I'll show you what a Russian sex and love! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100127155652.343A83A681A@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 07:56:51 -0800 (PST) Hello, my sun, you do not have a girl?
"I was completely free!
Click here From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Wed Jan 27 07:57:21 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AF5C28C0EC for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 07:57:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -87.519 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-87.519 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_60=1, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_NONE=0.1, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3Fq0JH01O6PF for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 07:57:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from noor.ddns.easy-lan.net (unknown [213.240.222.17]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9121428C0E9 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 07:57:20 -0800 (PST) From: Oksana To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: I came to you in the country, I have no money, looking for a rich man! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100127155720.9121428C0E9@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 07:57:20 -0800 (PST) Hello, my sun, you do not have a girl?
"I was completely free!
Click here From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Wed Jan 27 07:57:39 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C14133A6837 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 07:57:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -84.129 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-84.129 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_95=3, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, PLING_QUERY=1.39, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_NONE=0.1, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PBI3Rui6v6P1 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 07:57:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from noor.ddns.easy-lan.net (unknown [213.240.222.17]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43B5B3A681A for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 07:57:38 -0800 (PST) From: Polina To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Wives little? Visit us on the site! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100127155738.43B5B3A681A@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 07:57:38 -0800 (PST) Hey, why do not you write? You forgot about me? "I am very unhappy without you, remember me?"
It's me, Olga from Russia, Moscow, remember? I'm waiting for you on his page on the Internet, and miss you terribly!
Click here From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Wed Jan 27 12:33:19 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B96593A6828 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:33:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -13.731 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.731 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HELO_EQ_DIALUP=0.862, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HOST_EQ_DIALUP=0.862, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZnCT+NRkt5Fh for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:33:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from host-89-230-151-108.inowroclaw.mm.pl (host-89-230-148-10.inowroclaw.mm.pl [89.230.148.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DC013A67B2 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:33:18 -0800 (PST) From: Polina To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Like them adult games? You are not enough? Me too - let's play! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100127203319.0DC013A67B2@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:33:18 -0800 (PST) Hi, forgot to tell you that I changed my address and phone number - well,
I forgot your email, I hope that I write it for you,
very lonesome for you, come to my page - leave me your phone number or address in order that would we can continue to correspond!
Click here From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Wed Jan 27 12:33:45 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2644C3A67B2 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:33:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -13.731 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.731 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HELO_EQ_DIALUP=0.862, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HOST_EQ_DIALUP=0.862, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id U0jFVZ+a5mXK for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:33:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from host-89-230-151-108.inowroclaw.mm.pl (host-89-230-148-10.inowroclaw.mm.pl [89.230.148.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C77D3A6774 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:33:44 -0800 (PST) From: Svetlana To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: You want me? Come to me. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100127203344.6C77D3A6774@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:33:44 -0800 (PST) Hi handsome - you were so good in bed with me -
I want to again make love to you - no 1 man I had never done so well as you have done -
I'll procure very great pleasure - my body was looking at your pictures just on fire!
Click here From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Wed Jan 27 12:35:09 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3874E3A688C for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:35:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -24.681 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-24.681 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_EQ_PL=1.135, HOST_EQ_PL=1.95, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id K0dtlf4313gC for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:35:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from host-89-230-151-108.inowroclaw.mm.pl (host-89-230-148-10.inowroclaw.mm.pl [89.230.148.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79D233A6884 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:35:08 -0800 (PST) From: Uliya To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Hey - tell me your mobile - Katya from Russia. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100127203508.79D233A6884@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:35:08 -0800 (PST) Hello my dear - I've had a web camera with good quality
- sign up on my page - and I'll do what you want for you, long time not seen you in a web camera.
Click here From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Wed Jan 27 15:08:21 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8A083A6A3E for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 15:08:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -107.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-107.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AB+nZo-5wkla for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 15:08:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 567F328C0E9 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 15:08:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NaGsZ-0008I6-4t for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 23:00:55 +0000 Received: from [144.254.224.140] (helo=ams-iport-1.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NaGsW-0008HZ-Ej for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 23:00:52 +0000 Authentication-Results: ams-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AokAAD9UYEuQ/uCWe2dsb2JhbACbTAEBFiQGpTGJaQmNNIJJgXAE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,356,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="56554886" Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com ([144.254.224.150]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 27 Jan 2010 23:00:50 +0000 Received: from [192.168.49.197] (dhcp-10-55-91-50.cisco.com [10.55.91.50]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o0RN0oWQ004284; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 23:00:50 GMT Cc: John Brzozowski Message-Id: <32BAC14E-7032-4269-8E04-124925F7AF8A@cisco.com> From: Fred Baker To: IPv6 Operations In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Subject: Re: Comcast IPv6 Trials Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 00:00:50 +0100 References: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936) Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: John sent me a note today that I decided, given Comcast's previous presentations to the IPv6 Operations Working Group, might be of interest to the WG. On Jan 27, 2010, at 8:21 PM, John Jason Brzozowski wrote: > Fred, > > I am emailing you today to share some news that we hope you will find > interesting. > > Today we are announcing our 2010 IPv6 trials plans. For more > information > please visit the following web site: > > http://www.comcast6.net > > We have also made available a partial, dual-stack version of our > portal > which can be found at: > > http://ipv6.comcast.net > > Please do not hesitate to contact me via email with any questions, > comments, > or clarifications. > > If you feel that others will find this information interesting feel > free to > forward this message. > > Regards, > > John > ========================================= > John Jason Brzozowski > Comcast Cable > e) mailto:john_brzozowski@cable.comcast.com > o) 609-377-6594 > m) 484-962-0060 > ========================================= > > http://www.ipinc.net/IPv4.GIF From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Wed Jan 27 18:31:32 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51AF93A68D1 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:31:32 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:31:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from aic-immobilier.com (unknown [187.15.104.19]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id DB5003A687B for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:31:08 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: Deal of the Day To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100128023110.DB5003A687B@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:31:08 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 81280 Inc. All rights reserved.

From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Wed Jan 27 19:04:09 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C8913A68F1 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:04:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.677 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.677 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QQ54zkcGuHsM for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:04:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 727BA3A67F0 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:04:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NaKY2-000Hdp-KE for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 02:55:58 +0000 Received: from [209.85.216.204] (helo=mail-px0-f204.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NaKY0-000Hd6-Ey for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 02:55:56 +0000 Received: by pxi42 with SMTP id 42so332813pxi.5 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:55:55 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.143.25.22 with SMTP id c22mr714702wfj.195.1264647355527; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:55:55 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1F22A806-8341-4FB0-8135-3518574C7661@cisco.com> References: <1F22A806-8341-4FB0-8135-3518574C7661@cisco.com> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 00:55:55 -0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: abf52ae145dd50c2 Message-ID: <45e3c45f1001271855m3c2c066ep7cb206bb74fa267a@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-v6inixp-04.txt WGLC From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Eduardo_Ascen=E7o_Reis?= To: Fred Baker Cc: v6ops@ops.ietf.org, kurtis@kurtis.pp.se, rbonica@juniper.net, Roque Gagliano Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hi Roque, I would like to recall a previous discussion. 2009/11/9 Eduardo Ascen=E7o Reis : > ... > In this > configuration participants may route these prefixes inside their > networks (e. g. using BGP no-export communities or routing the IXP > LANs within the participants' IGP) to perform fault management. > ... > I recommend for AS to use next-hop-self on iBGP sessions, by doing > that there will be no need to redistribute IXP prefix into their IGP. > 2009/11/20 Roque Gagliano : > > The routing of the IXPs LANs inside the participants has to do with the u= se > of uRPF and being able to perform traceroutes. Using next-hop-self to you= r > iBGP sessions does not solve this problem. > I did not get your points. I agree that Unicast Reverse Path Forwarding (uRPF) may be a good solution for IPv6 IXP participants in order to get some extra protection against abuse conditions [1]. As uRPF is normally implemented on the network edge, the AS border router connected to the IXP already knows its IPv6 netblock (directly connected) and can check IPv6 source address against it. By the way, the exchange traffic that the AS may be more interested to check with uRPF wil have IPv6 source address from its peers prefixes. So there is no relation between uRPF and IPv6 IXP netblock being advertised on participant IGP. Regarding traceroute tests, if IPv6 IXP netblock is not know by a participant IGP, it will only affect tests done by a host inside this network against IXP IPv6 address, which may be something good. The traceroute originator host can normally receive icmp unreachable packets from intermediate routers with a non-reachable IPv6 source address. I understand that the fundamental routing point about this discussion is if the IPv6 prefixes learned by a participant AS have NEXT_HOP attribute reachable for the AS BGP enable routers, which may be done by routing the IPv6 IXP netblock inside the AS IGP or changing the prefixes NEXT_HOP for an AS internal IPv6 address (e.g. loopback from router connect to IXP). I personally prefer the second option and recommend that to be included in this document as an alternative approach. Thanks, --=20 Eduardo Ascen=E7o Reis [1] http://lacnic.net/documentos/lacnicxii/presentaciones/napla/06_Eduardo_= Ascenco_Reis.pdf From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Wed Jan 27 21:35:40 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA8963A688F for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 21:35:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.992 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.992 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.561, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, NUMERIC_HTTP_ADDR=0.001, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_UNA=1.231, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_OB_SURBL=10, URIBL_RHS_DOB=1.083, URIBL_SC_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hxCgLuH8LciH for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 21:35:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from cpc7-sgyl11-0-0-cust27.sgyl.cable.virginmedia.com (cpc7-sgyl11-0-0-cust27.sgyl.cable.virginmedia.com [82.41.204.28]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id DAC513A6881 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 21:35:32 -0800 (PST) To: Subject: Visitor v6ops-archive's personal 80% OFF From: Janelle Biggs MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100128053532.DAC513A6881@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 21:35:32 -0800 (PST)

If you have any difficulty seeing the contents of this e-mail, please click here.

This picture is blocked. Click to unblock now
Copyright © 2010 32225 Corp.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact Us | Unsubscribe
From secmech-request@lists.ietf.org Thu Jan 28 03:49:16 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F2493A6845 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 03:49:16 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 03:49:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from 0x55533554.adsl.cybercity.dk (0x55533554.adsl.cybercity.dk [85.83.53.84]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 7914B3A6782 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 03:49:00 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: Please Read To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100128114907.7914B3A6782@core3.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 03:49:00 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 38243 Inc. All rights reserved.

From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Thu Jan 28 03:55:14 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B2913A6A3A for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 03:55:14 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 03:55:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from adelphia.net (unknown [58.68.66.250]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 753433A6891 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 03:54:59 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: New Private Message for v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100128115501.753433A6891@core3.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 03:54:59 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 49971 Inc. All rights reserved.

From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Thu Jan 28 11:53:38 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8522E3A68FC for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 11:53:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -48.917 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-48.917 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_80=2, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_EQ_BR=0.955, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HELO_EQ_TELESP=1.245, HOST_EQ_BR=1.295, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_RECV_SPAM_DOMN02=1.666, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_SBL=20, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TR5t5AZRfzAt for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 11:53:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from 168.186.broadband13.iol.cz (168.186.broadband13.iol.cz [90.180.186.168]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB58D3A68AB for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 11:53:37 -0800 (PST) From: Elena To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: My Tender Bear - you missed me? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100128195337.BB58D3A68AB@core3.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 11:53:37 -0800 (PST) Hello - I like you did not say - do you remember when we made love three?
Who you like more? "I am a Russian girl with blonde or America?" Waiting for an answer - if you like - continue.
Click here From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Thu Jan 28 13:04:28 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CECC28C102 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 13:04:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.823 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.823 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.775, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JtwSNhIjtuPg for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 13:04:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FBB83A67FB for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 13:04:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NabQX-000OgL-Kq for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 20:57:21 +0000 Received: from [2001:13c7:7001:4000::3] (helo=mail.lacnic.net.uy) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NabQI-000OUX-Un for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 20:57:08 +0000 Received: from 85-7-200.lacnic.net.uy (unknown [200.7.85.78]) by mail.lacnic.net.uy (Postfix) with ESMTP id 273DA308475; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 18:56:50 -0200 (UYST) Subject: Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-v6inixp-04.txt WGLC Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-24-789790102 From: Roque Gagliano In-Reply-To: <308E2D25-1AEC-4B90-8FC3-6BCFFFA9DCDC@nosignal.org> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:58:35 +0100 Cc: v6ops@ops.ietf.org Message-Id: References: <1F22A806-8341-4FB0-8135-3518574C7661@cisco.com> <308E2D25-1AEC-4B90-8FC3-6BCFFFA9DCDC@nosignal.org> To: Andy Davidson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) X-LACNIC.uy-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-LACNIC.uy-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-LACNIC.uy-MailScanner-SpamCheck: X-LACNIC.uy-MailScanner-From: roque@lacnic.net Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: --Apple-Mail-24-789790102 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Thanks Andy for your comment, sorry for the delay. Please see answers inline. On Jan 18, 2010, at 11:08 PM, Andy Davidson wrote: >=20 > On 18 Jan 2010, at 16:00, Fred Baker wrote: >=20 >> This is to initiate a two week working group last call of = draft-ietf-v6ops-v6inixp-04.txt. Please read it now. If you find nits = (spelling errors, minor suggested wording changes, etc), comment to the = authors; if you find greater issues, such as disagreeing with a = statement or finding additional issues that need to be addressed, please = post your comments to the list. >>=20 >> We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the = document as well as its content. If you have read the document and = believe it to be of operational utility, that is also an important = comment to make. >=20 > I think it will be interesting to folk building IXPs, sure let's do = work on this document. >=20 > 3 - Addressing Plans - part 2 - the author may like to describe that = 32-bit ASN will require spanning across multiple biglets in the ipv6 = address - the example possibly suggests that the ASN encoding will = neatly fit into one portion of the address, and this is not true. I had that comment for the previous example using the decimal = representation. What about adding:=20 "In this case a maximum of 8 characters will be needed to represent 32 = bits ASNs."=20 > 6 - Route servers - md5 should be considered - I think this advice = should be taken out, as this recommendation is not generally accepted, = and the functioning/configuration of a route-server is well outside the = scope of this document. the idea was to name the variants of security configurations that are = normally configured. However, if there is consensus on removing this = text, I see no problem. >=20 > 6 - Route servers - we may like to publish some information on v6 = filtering to promote good hygiene between route-server peers. >=20 > Missing - link local address recommendations - Right now on an IXP = operational mailing list, some folk are making observations about link = local addressing used by IXP participants, and a recommendation may = follow. It may be sensible to explicitly forbid traffic for link local = protocols other than ND. I believe that is the information included in section 4.1 (4.1. = Multicast Support and Monitoring for ND at an IXP). Do you have particular comments on this section? >=20 > I am pleased to see the reference to ra-guard, as an operator of l2 = services I am looking forward to being able to roll this out to all of = my ports facing ixp participants and LAN access users ! >=20 Good!. Thanks again, Roque. > Andy >=20 --Apple-Mail-24-789790102 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

On 18 Jan = 2010, at 16:00, Fred Baker wrote:

This = is to initiate a two week working group last call of = draft-ietf-v6ops-v6inixp-04.txt. Please read it now. If you find nits = (spelling errors, minor suggested wording changes, etc), comment to the = authors; if you find greater issues, such as disagreeing with a = statement or finding additional issues that need to be addressed, please = post your comments to the list.

We are looking specifically for = comments on the importance of the document as well as its content. If = you have read the document and believe it to be of operational utility, = that is also an important comment to make.

I = think it will be interesting to folk building IXPs, sure let's do work = on this document.

3 - Addressing Plans - part 2 = - the author may like to describe that 32-bit ASN will require spanning = across multiple biglets in the ipv6 address - the example possibly = suggests that the ASN encoding will neatly fit into one portion of the = address, and this is not true.

I = had that comment for the previous example using the decimal = representation.  What about adding: 
"In this case a = maximum of 8 characters will be needed to represent 32 bits = ASNs." 


6 - Route servers - md5 = should be considered - I think this advice should be taken out, as this = recommendation is not generally accepted, and the = functioning/configuration of a route-server is well outside the scope of = this document.

the idea was to = name the variants of security configurations that are normally = configured. However, if there is consensus on removing this text, I see = no problem.


6 - Route servers - we may like = to publish some information on v6 filtering to promote good hygiene = between route-server peers.

Missing - link = local address recommendations - Right now on an IXP operational mailing = list, some folk are making observations about link local addressing used = by IXP participants, and a recommendation may follow.  It may be = sensible to explicitly forbid traffic for link local protocols other = than ND.

I believe that is = the information included in section 4.1 (4.1.  Multicast Support = and Monitoring for ND at an IXP).

Do you have = particular comments on this section?



I am = pleased to see the reference to ra-guard, as an operator of l2 services = I am looking forward to being able to roll this out to all of my ports = facing ixp participants and LAN access users = !


Good!.
<= div>
Thanks again,
Roque.

Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 39325 Inc. All rights reserved.

From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Thu Jan 28 19:18:16 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3208A3A67F0 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 19:18:16 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.677 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.677 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FpyUiP7mmyka for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 19:18:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 597EA3A67E2 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 19:18:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NahFF-000O2n-62 for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 03:10:05 +0000 Received: from [209.85.160.42] (helo=mail-pw0-f42.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NahFD-000O2Q-7k for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 03:10:03 +0000 Received: by pwi21 with SMTP id 21so1054894pwi.1 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 19:10:02 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.250.20 with SMTP id x20mr173416wfh.80.1264734602199; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 19:10:02 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <25DCDF74-6DC3-4C7D-86A8-0CF5C409642E@lacnic.net> References: <1F22A806-8341-4FB0-8135-3518574C7661@cisco.com> <45e3c45f1001271855m3c2c066ep7cb206bb74fa267a@mail.gmail.com> <25DCDF74-6DC3-4C7D-86A8-0CF5C409642E@lacnic.net> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 01:10:02 -0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 701d685caa63850f Message-ID: <45e3c45f1001281910w1ba5d7fwd7f4d57930465259@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-v6inixp-04.txt WGLC From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Eduardo_Ascen=E7o_Reis?= To: Roque Gagliano Cc: Fred Baker , v6ops@ops.ietf.org, kurtis@kurtis.pp.se, rbonica@juniper.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hi Roque, 2010/1/28 Roque Gagliano : > > (Roque) Eduardo, the problem is with downstream ISP customer's. > > IXP ---- ISP1 --- ISP2 > > ISP2 implements uRPF, in order to help him with troubleshooting without b= reaking uRPF the ISP1 announce the IXP LAN. Are you saying that ISP1 should advertise (BGP) the IPv6 Prefix corresponding to IXP LAN to ISP2? I understand that we are discussing about the case when IPv6 IXP LAN is not globally routed. Considering that ISP1 is not IXP owner/operator it has no authority to generate an IPv6 prefix on its BGP Internet table, neither advertise it to outside its domain. > > (Roque) In the previous example, for each traceroute passing by the IXP L= AN, the packet with source IP in the IXP LAN will be discarded thanks to uR= PF. > This is true for test from ISP2 to others IXP participants and if ISP2 has uRPF on its link to ISP1. But ISP2 is not an IXP participant and the IPv6 IXP LAN is not globally routed. So that is it. >> >> I understand that the fundamental routing point about this discussion >> is if the IPv6 prefixes learned by a participant AS have NEXT_HOP >> attribute reachable for the AS BGP enable routers, which may be done >> by routing the IPv6 IXP netblock inside the AS IGP or changing the >> prefixes NEXT_HOP for an AS internal IPv6 address (e.g. loopback from >> router connect to IXP). > > I do not get your point here. Are we still talking about the IXP LAN pref= ix? > Sure. We are discussing about Multilateral Peering Agreements, when participants normally establish their BGP sessions using IXP IPv6 LAN address and it is not globally routed. Considering that and in order for IPv6 prefixes learned from IXP peering sessions to be reachable inside their networks, participants AS have basically two options: 1. Route IPv6 IXP LAN into their IGP. 2. Change NEXT_HOP attribute to something reachable and under its domain (e.g. a /128 from one of its IPv6 netblocks). I still prefer the second option and recommend that to be included in this document as an alternative approach. Thanks, --=20 Eduardo Ascen=E7o Reis From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Fri Jan 29 01:42:26 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAAA63A687F for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 01:42:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 4.878 X-Spam-Level: **** X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.878 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_VERIZON_P=2.144, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HELO_EQ_VERIZON_POOL=1.495, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_SC_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uECh1EIpZe8a for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 01:42:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from pcsp248-200.dynamic.supercable.net.ve (pcsp248-200.dynamic.supercable.net.ve [200.35.248.200]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4ADB3A67D3 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 01:42:25 -0800 (PST) From: Jenya To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Sweet Lord, let him come unto me, my name is Maria, I am from Russia! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100129094225.C4ADB3A67D3@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 01:42:25 -0800 (PST) Hey - why do I stop writing? "I very much waited your letter - every day,
I now have a website, come to my page and write to me at last,
I'm waiting for you, and I want to meet with you, kisses - Nadia from Russia!
Click here From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Fri Jan 29 01:43:29 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F4DE3A687F for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 01:43:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.768 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.768 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_95=3, HELO_EQ_DYNAMIC=1.144, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_SC_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5cVUGukrY7Ad for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 01:43:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from pcsp248-200.dynamic.supercable.net.ve (pcsp248-200.dynamic.supercable.net.ve [200.35.248.200]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B6DD3A6808 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 01:43:27 -0800 (PST) From: Tanya To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: You are my good, my handsome - write me, I'm waiting! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100129094327.7B6DD3A6808@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 01:43:27 -0800 (PST) Hello sun - you forgot about me already?
I want to be with you again, write me or call, come with me to the page - there all my contact details.
Click here From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Fri Jan 29 04:29:59 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4EA63A6A10 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 04:29:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.066 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.066 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_DYNAMIC_SPLIT_IP=3.493, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HELO_EQ_DYNAMIC=1.144, HELO_EQ_IP_ADDR=1.119, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id McgzBIeOz+63 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 04:29:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from 125.26.69.245.adsl.dynamic.totbb.net (125.26.69.245.adsl.dynamic.totbb.net [125.26.69.245]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 623643A688D for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 04:29:57 -0800 (PST) From: Elena To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Tell me many kind words dear. Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100129122957.623643A688D@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 04:29:57 -0800 (PST)

Hello sun - you forgot about me already?
I want to be with you again, write me or call, come with me to the page - there all my contact details.
Click here

From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Fri Jan 29 04:30:19 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC9513A6A1F for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 04:30:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 3.726 X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.726 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HELO_DYNAMIC_SPLIT_IP=3.493, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HELO_EQ_DYNAMIC=1.144, HELO_EQ_IP_ADDR=1.119, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_STILLSINGLE=1.66, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UJtMrRD7Xz+o for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 04:30:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from 125.26.69.245.adsl.dynamic.totbb.net (125.26.69.245.adsl.dynamic.totbb.net [125.26.69.245]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D28C3A6A10 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 04:30:18 -0800 (PST) From: Elena To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Hey, you forgot about me? Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100129123018.5D28C3A6A10@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 04:30:18 -0800 (PST)

Hello! Spring has finally come! Romance is in the air!
Beautiful and still single (!!!) Russian and Ukrainian women are eager to meet you!
They have placed their profiles at SingleRussianGirls dating site and waiting for your emails.
Don’t loose time and come get registered FREE at
Click here

From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Fri Jan 29 13:10:43 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E45593A6889 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:10:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5CHEcERlhdzU for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:10:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E14733A659A for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:10:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NaxyW-000PNd-Sf for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 21:01:56 +0000 Received: from [2001:13c7:7001:4000::3] (helo=mail.lacnic.net.uy) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NaxyU-000PMs-45 for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 21:01:54 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.101] (77-56-111-12.dclient.hispeed.ch [77.56.111.12]) by mail.lacnic.net.uy (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF61730841C for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 19:01:46 -0200 (UYST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Subject: Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-v6inixp-04.txt WGLC From: Roque Gagliano In-Reply-To: <45e3c45f1001281910w1ba5d7fwd7f4d57930465259@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 22:03:38 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <1F22A806-8341-4FB0-8135-3518574C7661@cisco.com> <45e3c45f1001271855m3c2c066ep7cb206bb74fa267a@mail.gmail.com> <25DCDF74-6DC3-4C7D-86A8-0CF5C409642E@lacnic.net> <45e3c45f1001281910w1ba5d7fwd7f4d57930465259@mail.gmail.com> To: v6ops WG X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) X-LACNIC.uy-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-LACNIC.uy-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-LACNIC.uy-MailScanner-SpamCheck: X-LACNIC.uy-MailScanner-From: roque@lacnic.net Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hi Eduardo, Thanks for your comments. Please see my responses inline. On Jan 29, 2010, at 4:10 AM, Eduardo Ascen=E7o Reis wrote: > Hi Roque, >=20 > 2010/1/28 Roque Gagliano : >>=20 >> (Roque) Eduardo, the problem is with downstream ISP customer's. >>=20 >> IXP ---- ISP1 --- ISP2 >>=20 >> ISP2 implements uRPF, in order to help him with troubleshooting = without breaking uRPF the ISP1 announce the IXP LAN. >=20 > Are you saying that ISP1 should advertise (BGP) the IPv6 Prefix > corresponding to IXP LAN to ISP2? (Roque) I am not saying that it should or should not but that it a common = practice to avoind the mentioned problem. This is the correspondent text = in the document: (Section 3) "In this configuration participants may route these prefixes inside their networks (e. g. using BGP no-export communities or routing the IXP LANs within the participants' IGP) to perform fault management. " This specific text was extensively discussed in this WG, please see the = following messages: http://ops.ietf.org/lists/v6ops/v6ops.2009/msg00682.html http://ops.ietf.org/lists/v6ops/v6ops.2009/msg00680.html http://ops.ietf.org/lists/v6ops/v6ops.2009/msg00694.html http://ops.ietf.org/lists/v6ops/v6ops.2009/msg00530.html Do you have any specific improvement to the text? > I understand that we are discussing about the case when IPv6 IXP LAN > is not globally routed. Considering that ISP1 is not IXP > owner/operator it has no authority to generate an IPv6 prefix on its > BGP Internet table, neither advertise it to outside its domain. (Roque) This practice has to do with its customers (downstream), not globally = advertisement. Funny that you mentioned authorization, because this issue came out in = the SIDR mailing list a couple of month ago about how to handle this = problem. The conclusion was that IXP operators would have to authorize = each participant to originate the IXP LAN prefix issuing a ROA for each = participant ASN. You can read the thread at: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sidr/current/msg00975.html >=20 >>=20 >> (Roque) In the previous example, for each traceroute passing by the = IXP LAN, the packet with source IP in the IXP LAN will be discarded = thanks to uRPF. >>=20 >=20 > This is true for test from ISP2 to others IXP participants and if ISP2 > has uRPF on its link to ISP1. >=20 > But ISP2 is not an IXP participant and the IPv6 IXP LAN is not > globally routed. So that is it. >=20 >>>=20 >>> I understand that the fundamental routing point about this = discussion >>> is if the IPv6 prefixes learned by a participant AS have NEXT_HOP >>> attribute reachable for the AS BGP enable routers, which may be done >>> by routing the IPv6 IXP netblock inside the AS IGP or changing the >>> prefixes NEXT_HOP for an AS internal IPv6 address (e.g. loopback = from >>> router connect to IXP). >>=20 >> I do not get your point here. Are we still talking about the IXP LAN = prefix? >>=20 >=20 > Sure. We are discussing about Multilateral Peering Agreements, when > participants normally establish their BGP sessions using IXP IPv6 LAN > address and it is not globally routed. >=20 > Considering that and in order for IPv6 prefixes learned from IXP > peering sessions to be reachable inside their networks, participants > AS have basically two options: > 1. Route IPv6 IXP LAN into their IGP. > 2. Change NEXT_HOP attribute to something reachable and under its > domain (e.g. a /128 from one of its IPv6 netblocks). >=20 (Roque) So, you are basically talking about the configuration of the = iBGP sessions from the router to its own network. I do not think this = belongs to this document. Roque. > I still prefer the second option and recommend that to be included in > this document as an alternative approach. >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > --=20 >=20 > Eduardo Ascen=E7o Reis From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Fri Jan 29 15:40:17 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AAB228C0E4 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 15:40:17 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 15:40:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from bzq-109-66-184-115.red.bezeqint.net (bzq-84-110-72-12.red.bezeqint.net [84.110.72.12]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id DE93528C0EA for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 15:40:07 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: Missed the Final Specials? To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100129234009.DE93528C0EA@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 15:40:07 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 28128 Inc. All rights reserved.

From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Fri Jan 29 21:05:26 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E90873A6864 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 21:05:26 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 21:05:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from PPPoE-57-10.EuroCom.Od.UA (PPPoE-57-10.EuroCom.Od.UA [93.88.57.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 33B5F3A6801 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 21:05:23 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: Your Future Order with 77% off retail To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100130050524.33B5F3A6801@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 21:05:23 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 54521 Inc. All rights reserved.

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Sat Jan 30 02:33:56 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 646D83A6806 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 02:33:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -65.242 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-65.242 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_EQ_SK=1.35, HOST_EQ_SK=0.555, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URIBL_SBL=20, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fNN97eCV7vd3 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 02:33:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from 201-35-255-215.fnses700.dsl.brasiltelecom.net.br (201-35-255-215.fnses700.dsl.brasiltelecom.net.br [201.35.255.215]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86B313A67FA for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 02:33:55 -0800 (PST) From: Alexandra To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Finally I found you on the computer, my good! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100130103355.86B313A67FA@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 02:33:55 -0800 (PST) Hi, forgot to tell you that I changed my address and phone number - well,
I forgot your email, I hope that I write it for you,
very lonesome for you, come to my page - leave me your phone number or address in order that would we can continue to correspond!
Click here From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Sat Jan 30 02:34:32 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D8C53A6820 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 02:34:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -57.261 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-57.261 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_95=3, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_SBL=20, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ySv3u2SFD9IO for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 02:34:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from 201-35-255-215.fnses700.dsl.brasiltelecom.net.br (201-35-255-215.fnses700.dsl.brasiltelecom.net.br [201.35.255.215]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93CDD3A6808 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 02:34:31 -0800 (PST) From: Nadya To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Sweet Lord, call me on my cell! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100130103431.93CDD3A6808@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 02:34:31 -0800 (PST) Greetings - send me your photos where you are naked - I was so excited,
my you look at my site in your profile - added new pictures today!
Click here From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Sat Jan 30 02:35:57 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1FAF3A6839 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 02:35:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -63.549 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-63.549 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_EQ_PL=1.135, HOST_EQ_PL=1.95, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, PLING_QUERY=1.39, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URIBL_SBL=20, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b-7qFSdcruvb for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 02:35:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from 201-35-255-215.fnses700.dsl.brasiltelecom.net.br (201-35-255-215.fnses700.dsl.brasiltelecom.net.br [201.35.255.215]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 211F53A67FA for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 02:35:55 -0800 (PST) From: Olya To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Want to know what the real Russian girls love and warmth? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100130103556.211F53A67FA@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 02:35:55 -0800 (PST) Hello again - you give me all this time did not write,
you are fed up with me to communicate - or just email for a long time?
Write to me - I now have a website but still icq, and msn, I'd be happy to talk to you, your Yana from Russia!
Click here From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Sat Jan 30 03:16:10 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14CF63A67AB for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 03:16:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -72.852 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-72.852 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_95=3, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR2=4.395, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_08=1.787, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_1=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_HTML_A_BODY=0.742, TVD_RCVD_IP=1.931, TVD_SPACE_RATIO=2.219, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ot7DVoKQYlE7 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 03:16:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from 117-1-95-178.pool.ukrtel.net (117-1-95-178.pool.ukrtel.net [178.95.1.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id E9B303A685B for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 03:16:07 -0800 (PST) To: Subject: Delivery Status Notification From: MIME-Version: 1.0 Importance: High Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100130111607.E9B303A685B@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 03:16:07 -0800 (PST) Having trouble viewing this email? Click here to view as a webpage. From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Sat Jan 30 04:08:13 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94F013A685E for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 04:08:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -82.882 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-82.882 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HELO_EQ_RU=0.595, HOST_EQ_RU=0.875, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_08=1.787, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_1=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_HTML_A_BODY=0.742, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id m+8vkbUGf2TP for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 04:08:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from h109-187-25-102.dyn.bashtel.ru (h109-187-25-102.dyn.bashtel.ru [109.187.25.102]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id CCE0B3A685A for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 04:08:11 -0800 (PST) To: Subject: Re: Order status From: MIME-Version: 1.0 Importance: High Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100130120811.CCE0B3A685A@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 04:08:11 -0800 (PST) Having trouble viewing this email? Click here to view as a webpage. From smf-discussion@lists.ietf.org Sat Jan 30 13:42:19 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C8DC3A6873 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 13:42:19 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 13:42:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from 93-44-79-19.ip96.fastwebnet.it (93-44-79-19.ip96.fastwebnet.it [93.44.79.19]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 2E4BD3A6861 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 13:42:00 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: Your Discount Code on Amazon for v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100130214208.2E4BD3A6861@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 13:42:00 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 47785 Inc. All rights reserved.

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Sat Jan 30 14:45:04 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E6973A67E5 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:45:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.34 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.34 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J4OsBmMDsjMP for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:45:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from pc-187-98-86-200.cm.vtr.net (pc-187-98-86-200.cm.vtr.net [200.86.98.187]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B87D63A67DB for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:45:02 -0800 (PST) From: Elena To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: I'll see you I really liked - let's get acquainted! I am from Russia! Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100130224502.B87D63A67DB@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:45:02 -0800 (PST)

Hi handsome - you were so good in bed with me -
I want to again make love to you - no 1 man I had never done so well as you have done -
I'll procure very great pleasure - my body was looking at your pictures just on fire!
Click here

From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Sat Jan 30 14:45:11 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A3913A67E5 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:45:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.66 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.66 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_SC_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gKTOWExkHnqD for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:45:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from pc-187-98-86-200.cm.vtr.net (pc-187-98-86-200.cm.vtr.net [200.86.98.187]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A902D3A67DB for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:45:09 -0800 (PST) From: Elena To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: Long time have not seen you, when you write me? Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100130224509.A902D3A67DB@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:45:09 -0800 (PST)

Hello sun - you forgot about me already?
I want to be with you again, write me or call, come with me to the page - there all my contact details.
Click here

From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Sat Jan 30 20:52:12 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA1543A68D4 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 20:52:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -82.572 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-82.572 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, HELO_EQ_PL=1.135, HOST_EQ_PL=1.95, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FrRIj6pY7zyx for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 20:52:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from 1-10-zbasz1.tdi.tktelekom.pl (1-10-zbasz1.tdi.tktelekom.pl [82.160.253.171]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BDE73A683D for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 20:52:11 -0800 (PST) From: Ksenya To: v6ops-archive@ietf.org Subject: Want to be with me? Write me sms. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100131045211.7BDE73A683D@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 20:52:11 -0800 (PST) Hi handsome - you were so good in bed with me -
I want to again make love to you - no 1 man I had never done so well as you have done -
I'll procure very great pleasure - my body was looking at your pictures just on fire!

[ Click here ] From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Sat Jan 30 20:52:37 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97FFC3A68D4 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 20:52:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -84.072 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-84.072 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_80=2, HELO_EQ_PL=1.135, HOST_EQ_PL=1.95, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id d0AesbB9CVcO for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 20:52:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from 1-10-zbasz1.tdi.tktelekom.pl (1-10-zbasz1.tdi.tktelekom.pl [82.160.253.171]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18A903A683D for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 20:52:35 -0800 (PST) From: Ksenya To: v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Finally I found you on the computer, my good! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100131045236.18A903A683D@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 20:52:35 -0800 (PST) Hello my dear - I've had a web camera with good quality
- sign up on my page - and I'll do what you want for you, long time not seen you in a web camera.

[ Click here ] From v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Sat Jan 30 20:54:07 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26A713A683D for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 20:54:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -83.072 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-83.072 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_95=3, HELO_EQ_PL=1.135, HOST_EQ_PL=1.95, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tDQP73dN+Mni for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 20:54:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from 1-10-zbasz1.tdi.tktelekom.pl (1-10-zbasz1.tdi.tktelekom.pl [82.160.253.171]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAB403A6768 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 20:54:05 -0800 (PST) From: Oksana To: v6ops-archive@megatron.ietf.org Subject: I came to you, and your number does not answer, Anna. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20100131045405.CAB403A6768@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 20:54:05 -0800 (PST) Greetings - send me your photos where you are naked - I was so excited,
my you look at my site in your profile - added new pictures today!

[ Click here ] From v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org Sun Jan 31 04:42:21 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F5083A68A9 for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2010 04:42:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -80.798 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-80.798 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC=4.295, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_08=1.787, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_1=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_HTML_A_BODY=0.742, URI_HEX=0.368, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5fnprrB68IsL for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2010 04:42:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from cpc1-brig13-0-0-cust445.brig.cable.ntl.com (cpc1-brig13-0-0-cust445.brig.cable.ntl.com [82.24.13.190]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 800263A6821 for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2010 04:42:19 -0800 (PST) To: Subject: Your order From: MIME-Version: 1.0 Importance: High Content-Type: text/html Message-Id: <20100131124219.800263A6821@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2010 04:42:19 -0800 (PST) Having trouble viewing this email? Click here to view as a webpage. From v6ops-archive@ietf.org Sun Jan 31 09:54:59 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D944C3A67EB for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2010 09:54:59 -0800 (PST) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char C2 hex): From: Approved VIAGRA\302\256 Store ; Sun, 31 Jan 2010 09:54:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from agf.com.br (unknown [186.84.231.73]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 45D633A67D1 for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2010 09:54:51 -0800 (PST) From: Approved VIAGRA® Store Subject: Your Discount Code on Amazon for v6ops-archive@ietf.org To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 100131-0, 31/01/2010), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Message-Id: <20100131175452.45D633A67D1@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2010 09:54:51 -0800 (PST)
Trouble viewing this mail? Read it online

No graphics displayed? Click here
 

The e-mail address is v6ops-archive@ietf.org
Unsubscribe from this e-mail | FAQ | Advertise | Privacy Policy

Copyright 56318 Inc. All rights reserved.

From owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Sun Jan 31 18:59:45 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21CA33A69CD for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2010 18:59:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.677 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.677 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mA2OBKQz3ECy for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2010 18:59:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D0983A6889 for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2010 18:59:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NbmKr-000PPO-34 for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Mon, 01 Feb 2010 02:48:21 +0000 Received: from [209.85.216.204] (helo=mail-px0-f204.google.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NbmKn-000POp-PN for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2010 02:48:17 +0000 Received: by pxi42 with SMTP id 42so8336802pxi.5 for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2010 18:48:16 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.250.18 with SMTP id x18mr2703549wfh.169.1264992496670; Sun, 31 Jan 2010 18:48:16 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <1F22A806-8341-4FB0-8135-3518574C7661@cisco.com> <45e3c45f1001271855m3c2c066ep7cb206bb74fa267a@mail.gmail.com> <25DCDF74-6DC3-4C7D-86A8-0CF5C409642E@lacnic.net> <45e3c45f1001281910w1ba5d7fwd7f4d57930465259@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2010 00:48:16 -0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: a1a0d6fbbbaaf52f Message-ID: <45e3c45f1001311848i3d63b8d6r85a278ac42268eb9@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-v6inixp-04.txt WGLC From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Eduardo_Ascen=E7o_Reis?= To: Roque Gagliano Cc: v6ops WG Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hi Roque, This is my last message to this thread just to conclude the participation and enforce the go ahead to this document. I was previously trying to highlight that globally routing (or not) IXP IPv6 LAN is not only related to measurement and security (DoS) points, but also with routing between IXP participants. And how they deal with NEXT_HOP attribute on IPv6 prefixes learned from other participants is an important matter. But I also agree that this topic is out of scope to this document. Considering that, I would like to suggest the following change to the text: +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3. Addressing Plan (...) When considering the routing of the IXP LANs two options are identified: o IXPs may decide that LANs should not to be globally routed in order to limit the possible origins of a Denial of Service (DoS) attack to its particpants' AS boundaries. o IXP may decide that LANs should be globally routed. In this case, IXP LANs monitoring from outside its participants' AS boundaries is possible but the IXP LANs will be vulnerable to DoS from outside of those boundaries. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ So, removing the following part: " In this configuration participants may route these prefixes inside their networks (e. g. using BGP no-export communities or routing the IXP LANs within the participants' IGP) to perform fault management. Using this configuration, the monitoring of the IXP LANs from outside of its participants' AS boundaries is not possible." Thanks, --=20 Eduardo Ascen=E7o Reis