On 10/6/16, 3:30 PM, "sunset4 on behalf of JORDI PALET MARTINEZ"
<sunset4-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of jordi.pa...@consulintel.es> wrote:
>Despite how much I like all those ideas, I don't think we are ready to
have an IPv6-only IETF network.
>
>Unfortunately, there are many applications, VPNs, etc., which will not
work just with NAT64, because literals, etc.
Can you make a list?
Or, can we start a list, and have people add things to it at the next
meeting, so we can work to resolve them by the following meeting?
The idea is not to create a list, on the other way around, is to use our
“behaviour” to discover what are the apps or destinations that we use and don’t
support IPv6, to create the “list” automatically.
We just need some kind of logging of everything using the DNS64 or the CLAT,
which means is not IPv6 enabled.
>
>I will suggest something alternative at this stage:
>
>Having the IETF network as a typical SME or residential customer of an ISP
which has run out of IPv4 addresses, provides an IPv6-only WAN link and uses
CLAT (464XLAT) at the customer CPE.
How well-tested is that in laptop environments? The only deployments I know
of are on mobile networks, which have a different set of applications and
protocols using them. Do you know of others?
I recall having seen and OpenWRT implementation, and some Japanese CPEs. I’m
sure there are many others.
>
>This means having GUA addresses but only private IPv4 address, and having
a router behaving as the IETF network “CPE” supporting CLAT.
>
>Of course we still need the NAT64+DNS64.
>
>This way, we will have a high proportion of IPv6 traffic and we can take
some measurements about “what” apps and Internet end-points are still using the
NAT64/DNS64, and what apps are using the CLAT and we can also have the
secretariat or ISOC to make sure to talk with those organizations to let know
them that they have a problem …
Do you mean NAT64 on a different SSID as the 464xlat? I'm confused.
Just a single SSID. 464XLAT is two folds, NAT64/DNS64 on the “ISP” side, and
CLAT on the CE or CPE.
So you have 3 possible cases of “apps”:
Basically, whatever in the IETF network is able to use IPv6 end-to-end, will
pass thru directly.
If something is using DNS, then it will use the NAT64/DNS64 (single translation
6->4 at the network).
Whatever is using literals, will use both the CLAT (translation4->6 at the
CPE), and then translation at the NAT64 (4->6)
Lee
>
>
>Saludos,
>Jordi
>
>
>-----Mensaje original-----
>De: sunset4 <sunset4-boun...@ietf.org> en nombre de Lee Howard
<l...@asgard.org>
>Responder a: <l...@asgard.org>
>Fecha: jueves, 6 de octubre de 2016, 21:03
>Para: <sunset4@ietf.org>
>Asunto: [sunset4] Sunset4 work
>
> After the last WG meeting, I walked away with seven things that I
thought we needed to do:
>
>
> 1. Update my v4historic draft. I intend to do this in time for the
Seoul meeting.
> 2. Phillip Hallam-Baker suggested something like
"draft-baker-ipv4status-its-complicated." I would like to hear more about this,
and read a draft.
> 3. The IAB should tell partner SDOs that their work should support
IPv6. We're working on this, and should have an update before the meeting.
> 4. The IESG or IETF community should squelch IPv4-only charters. I
think the IESG would rather see a community statement, so we're hoping for a
draft in the next couple of weeks.
> 5. WG Chairs and IETF communicty looks for IPv4 literals, IPv4-only
examples, IPv4 dependencies, and clean them up. Does anyone see a way to
structure this, or is there no followup to be had here?
> 6. Run IPv6+NAT64 as the default IETF SSID. I've discussed with Jari
and Jim, and they're only reluctant if doing this impedes participants getting
work done. Does anyone have any ideas for how to show this? Volunteers?
> 7. Update id-nits checked to look for IPv4-only examples. Done!
>
> I therefore think there's enough work to justify a meeting in Seoul,
and have said so to the WG chairs.
>
> On this list, I'd like to hear ideas about how to structure
work/followup on #5 and #6.
>
> Are there other topics we should discuss?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Lee
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sunset4 mailing list
> sunset4@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4
>
>
>
>
>**********************************************
>IPv4 is over
>Are you ready for the new Internet ?
>http://www.consulintel.es
>The IPv6 Company
>
>This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the
individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that
any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
information, including attached files, is prohibited.
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>sunset4 mailing list
>sunset4@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4
_______________________________________________
sunset4 mailing list
sunset4@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4
**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company
This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the
individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that
any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
information, including attached files, is prohibited.
_______________________________________________
sunset4 mailing list
sunset4@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4
