Subject: draft-gont-v6ops-slaac-renum: Clarification to the issue raised by Eric Vyncke

From: Fernando Gont <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 14:02:00 -0300

Folks/Eric,

During the 6man session, Eric was concerned about what would happen if a 
router were to split the configuration into multiple prefixes, and 
packets got lost.

The algorithm does take care of that, as follows:

* Addresses for a given prefix will be deprecated (un-preferred) *if*:
     1) the router advertises multiple prefixes *and*
     2) splits PIOs into multiple RAs *and*
     3) one of such RAs gets lost

* However, addresses will not be eliminated right-away. And we can set
   Valid Lifetime to an appropriate value to accommodate for the case
   where all the above conditions take place, such that multiple packet
   losses are accommodated. At the very least, addresses would be
   unpreferred in a timelier manner, which is already a very big win.

Also, please note:
* We are unaware of any real-world scenario where routers split options
   into multiple RAs.

* The document recommends to send all options in the same RA. And we
   could add that, if not possible, at least all PIOs are sent in the
   same RA.

All the above said, this is so far an individual submission. And we'd 
like the wg to take on this document as a wg item, and improved as much 
as necessary.

Thanks!

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

---

From: Fernando Gont <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 14:07:18 -0300

FWIW, the title should have been "draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum".

---

From: Loganaden Velvindron <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 21:13:12 +0400

> > like the wg to take on this document as a wg item, and improved as much
The draft is useful. I understand that there are issues with the
design of the algorithm. I would
be happy to see the draft adopted as a WG document.

> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> [email-masked]
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------