Re: [Int-area] Completion of working group last call for draft-ietf-intarea-nat-reveal-analysis-02
Med, My opinion, not as AD, is that this document should not make a recommendation. This document should be strictly an analysis so that we have a baseline understanding of all the existing solutions. Brian On 7/30/12 2:41 AM, mohamed.boucad...@orange.com wrote: Dear Lars, Could be more explict and explain what is missing in draft-ietf-intarea-nat-reveal-analysis-02 to reach that stage? Thanks. Cheers, Med -Message d'origine- De : Eggert, Lars [mailto:l...@netapp.com] Envoyé : vendredi 27 juillet 2012 18:29 À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/NAD/TIP Cc : sarik...@ieee.org; Internet Area Objet : Re: [Int-area] Completion of working group last call for draft-ietf-intarea-nat-reveal-analysis-02 On Jul 27, 2012, at 0:09, mohamed.boucad...@orange.com wrote: The argument I heard in Paris meeting for including a recommendation is to help vendors to select the solution to implement in their devices. They can not provide the same feature using 8 implementation options. That argument makes sense to me. We're not at the stage yet where we can recommend anything to vendors. We first need to determine if there even is a solution where the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. Lars ___ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area ___ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
Re: [Int-area] Completion of working group last call for draft-ietf-intarea-nat-reveal-analysis-02
In your previous mail you wrote: > You keep saying "privacy", but without explaining the problem or > how IPv4 address sharing makes privacy better or worse than IPv6. => there are two levels about the privacy problem: the technical one which is explained/addressed in the draft (section 4) and worse the way it can be perceived which is less (or not at all) rational as the long and silly history of the "privacy extensions for stateless address autoconfiguration in IPv6" (RFC 3041 and 4941) has shown. So there is a technical and a "political" argument against the whole HOST_ID idea. Unfortunately the IETF (and this mailing list) can only deal with the first one. Regards francis.dup...@fdupont.fr PS: to discuss about the technical point IMHO no HOST_ID proposal brings a clear advantage. The real issue (address sharing breaks the address == identity assumption) has to be solved by the impacted part (i.e., people should accept this assumption doesn't apply)... ___ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
Re: [Int-area] Completion of working group last call for draft-ietf-intarea-nat-reveal-analysis-02
Hi, On Jul 29, 2012, at 23:41, mohamed.boucad...@orange.com wrote: > Could be more explict and explain what is missing in > draft-ietf-intarea-nat-reveal-analysis-02 to reach that stage? the goal of this draft was to survey the options. I don't think it should make any recommendation at all. If there was a solution for which the benefits outweigh the drawbacks (which I don't think there is), the adoption of a document that specifies it by the IETF and the eventual publication of that document would constitute an IETF recommendation. Lars smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
[Int-area] Fwd: Need volunteers for the NomCom
Hi all, If you are eligible for the Nomcom, please consider volunteering. Thanks Suresh Original Message Subject: Need volunteers for the NomCom Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2012 23:22:33 -0400 From: NomCom Chair To: Working Group Chairs We are currently looking for volunteers to serve on the 2012-2013 NomCom. As you know, the success of the NomCom process depends crucially on having a large pool of volunteers from throughout the IETF community. In particular, it is valuable for the pool of volunteers to have strong representation from all of the technical areas within the IETF. I understand that not all IETF participants read the IETF announce list frequently. Therefore, if you would be willing to inform active participants in your working groups about this year's call for NomCom volunteers, I would greatly appreciate it. The NomCom 2012-2013 Call for Volunteers is open until this Sunday, August 5. Details can be found at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ann/nomcom/49851/ Thank you for your help, - Matt Lepinski mlepinski.i...@gmail.com nomcom-ch...@ietf.org ___ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
