**Session Date/Time:** 25 Jul 2024 16:30

# v6ops

## Summary

The v6ops meeting covered several topics including updates on the CLAT node recommendations draft, IPV6 CE router standards, deployment considerations for IPv6-mostly networks, and a problem statement regarding variable Interface IDs (IIDs).  A presentation on RA Lifetime metrics was also given. Discussion included terminology, implementation challenges, and potential solutions for improving IPv6 deployment and operation.

## Key Discussion Points

*   **CLAT Node Recommendations Draft:**
    *   Terminology changes were made to redefine native IP and clarify the use of the term "session."
    *   The requirement for continuing CLAT when native IPv4 is available was strengthened to "must not" (with an escape hatch for specific configurations).
    *   IPv4 availability was defined more precisely, and the handling of IPv4-only DNS queries was clarified.
    *   There was debate about the correct pronunciation of "CLAT" (C-LAT, C-LOT, etc.).
    *   An open PR exists for using the IPv4 default route for detecting native IPv4 availability.
    *   Discussion occurred around ensuring proper MTU size for CLAT IPv4 interface.
*   **IPV6 CE Router Standards (Update to RFC 7084):**
    *   The draft was updated to a BCP.
    *   Clarification was added regarding NTP relaying within the LAN.
    *   Support for first-hop filtering was added.
    *   Ingress filtering (spoof attack prevention) was upgraded back to a "must" with disable option.
    *   Discussion took place regarding the inclusion of Slack renumbering, unique local considerations, and the CPE LAN PD draft.
    *   Discussion regarding whether ingress filtering should be enabled by default vs enabled by user.
    *   Discussion regarding the inclusion of UPNP vs PCP.
*   **IPV6 Mostly Networks Deployment and Operations Considerations:**
    *   Security considerations were added, emphasizing the increased visibility of IPv6 issues in IPv6-only environments and the risks of spoofing NAT64.
    *   Known issues, such as IPv4 dependencies in network admission control, were added.
    *   The draft's focus is currently primarily on operational considerations for network engineers, with potential additions of application-level recommendations.
    *   Discussion about DNS64's role in IPv6-mostly networks.
    *   Discussion around using globally unique link-local addresses.
*   **Variable IADs Problem Statement:**
    *   The inflexible standard of 64-bit interface IDs was discussed, particularly in private/enterprise contexts.
    *   Challenges related to VLSM, fixed provisioning systems, and home/SoOff environments were presented.
    *   A proposed solution involves using the PIO field to signal the length of the variable IID, while maintaining backward compatibility.
    *   Several members felt that changing the protocol was the wrong priority as the issue was due to implementation limitations not protocol limitations.
    *   Concerns were raised about the complexities introduced by having both old and new devices on the same link, and that ultimately the proposal did not solve the neighbor discovery cash problem.
*   **RA Lifetime Metrics:**
    *   Data was presented on RA lifetime values collected from Android devices.
    *   Low RA lifetime values (e.g., 1 second, 30 seconds) were identified as a concern for battery life on mobile devices.
    *   Discussion regarding client side deem skipping on mobile devices.
    *   A Ciscuital, except array Lifetime, was introduced in Android and feedback was requested.
    *   Discussion regarding D-TEM period and impact on mobile battery life.

## Decisions and Action Items

*   **CLAT Node Recommendations Draft:**
    *   Authors will consider the feedback on the pronunciation of CLAT.
    *   Continue discussion on IPv4 detection methods (default route vs. address type check) on the mailing list.
    *   Address concerns about implementer choices regarding checksum new choice on the mailing list.
*   **IPV6 CE Router Standards:**
    *   Authors to consider discussion points and update the draft.
    *   **Action Item**: Chairs to initiate a working group adoption call.
*   **IPV6 Mostly Networks Deployment and Operations Considerations:**
        * Gula should be included in a separate document
    *   Authors to update the draft.
    *   **Action Item**: Chairs to consider working group adoption call.
*   **Variable IADs Problem Statement:**
    *   **Action Item:** Authors to take comments and address them on the mailing list.
*   **RA Lifetime Metrics:**
    *   Discussion to continue to identify ways to improve the user experience.
    *   Encourage authors to update RFC 7777 with the data.

## Next Steps

*   Continue discussion on the mailing lists for each draft.
*   Authors to address feedback and update drafts accordingly.
*   Chairs to initiate adoption calls for IPV6 CE Router Standards and IPV6 Mostly Networks Deployment and Operations Considerations if appropriate.
*   Participants to review and comment on drafts in last call and adoption queue.