Subject: Re: [dhcwg] [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host)

From: Fernando Gont <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 10:50:04 +0800

On 11/13/2017 10:17 AM, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Nov 13, 2017, at 10:14 AM, Lorenzo Colitti <[email-masked]
> <mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
>> Excuse me, but I really cannot fathom why we are saying that this
>> draft defines a new protocol when it is an explicit goal for all
>> existing implementations to continue to work. How can this be a new
>> protocol when all implementations implement this already?
> 
> All host implementations have to work.   In order for them to work, new
> router behavior has to be specified.   That sounds like a protocol spec
> to me.  My question would be, why is this a problem?   I think that the
> document could be clearer about required behavior, but it already
> basically says what needs to happen. 

If it's a BCP, then it should state what it wants to achieve, and note
that there is a standardized way to do it (DHCPv6-PD), and there are
products width non-standard mechanisms based SLAAC. And that's fair enough.

If somebody is willing to specify PD for SLAAC, then they should write
an I-D targeting 6man -- one might also wonder if also name it SSLAAC,
or just AAC (if there's a lack of a better name :-) )

Putting state into SLAAC will likely trigger "WTH!?" moments,
particulaly in folks that are already having a hard figuring out how all
the IPv6 automatic configuration pieces fit together.

I also wonder what's the logic with which we'd be specifying PD for
SLAAC... and also wondering if we're also going to specify a route
option for DHCPv6, and the like. And, if we're essentially going to
disregard anything and everything that can already be done in a standard
way with DHCPv6 and hack it into slaac instead, why we don't we just
close dhc wg.

Doing a half-baked sateful SLAAC for PD, and telling the community that
that's our best current practice seems to be like sending the wrong
message...

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: [email-masked]
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492