[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Distributing site-wide RFC 3484 policy
On 24-jul-2007, at 10:10, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
Before moving to "draft-fujisaki-dhc-addr-select-04.txt",
Can't find a draft with that name...
- the entire "source address selection" stuff was a mistake.
network has to be deployed so that any ip6_src/ip6_dst pair can go
out of the organization somehow.
That ship has sailed. Even if you could, through some kind of
herculian effort, make it so that only a single IPv6 address is
available per host rather than 1 or more for 1 or more interfaces,
there's going to be the issue of having both an IPv4 and an IPv6
address. I currently have a mail client that won't fall back to IPv4
if IPv6 doesn't work. That's not acceptable.
(a) if there's some issue like uRPF in some of your ISPs, the
routers in your organization should implement source-based
routing to workaround it.
When a host has selected addresses, other boxes can't overrule that.
The best thing you can do is generate a quick unreachable so the host
can retry with a different source/dest address combination.
(b) the whole idea of ULA/ULA-x should be killed at once.
No it shouldn't. People want it, no reasonable counter arguments have
- alain durand said that he would prefer to have single IPv6 address
on a node. i would not go that far (for renumbering and multi-
address multihoming) but i object to have addresses with different
reachability or "scoping".
You should have spoken up somewhere in the last century. This stuff
is a done deal today, no point in turning back halfway and turning
back completely is not possible at this point.
- so, there's no need for you to think about "distributing source
address selection policy".
Deciding for other people what they don't need is extremely impolite.