From simon.perreault@viagenie.ca Thu Dec 6 03:41:20 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18D5921F874D for ; Thu, 6 Dec 2012 03:41:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.584 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.584 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.015, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BR5XDU3Utg5h for ; Thu, 6 Dec 2012 03:41:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from jazz.viagenie.ca (jazz.viagenie.ca [IPv6:2620:0:230:8000::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54CD521F873C for ; Thu, 6 Dec 2012 03:41:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from porto.nomis80.org (85-169-39-219.rev.numericable.fr [85.169.39.219]) by jazz.viagenie.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 928C2469E7 for ; Thu, 6 Dec 2012 06:41:12 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <50C08454.6070406@viagenie.ca> Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 12:41:08 +0100 From: Simon Perreault User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121029 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sunset4@ietf.org References: <000001cdc0f5$73d21240$5b7636c0$@asgard.org> In-Reply-To: <000001cdc0f5$73d21240$5b7636c0$@asgard.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [sunset4] review of sunset4-gap-analysis X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 11:41:20 -0000 Le 2012-11-12 17:47, Lee Howard a écrit : > I promised to review the document. I have not included proofreading notes > (spelling, grammar, etc.) but I would be happy to do so. Thanks! Sorry for taking so long to reply. Busy... > Abstract: > "and identifies the gaps resulting in additional work" > /resulting in/requiring Ok. > Related work: the RFCs in this list are lists of RFCs requiring IPv4. Have > the authors reviewed them to see whether any protocol work is required? The > documents often point to works-in-progress as of 2004; has all of that work > been completed? As Wes said. I just don't want to go there. It was a tremendous amount of work when that review was being done. But it had a different goal: identifying IPv4-only stuff in protocols. Our goal is different because we're focusing on the operational side: what prevents people from actually turning off IPv4. Sometimes it can be related to IPv4-only protocol elements, but often not. A protocol having an IPv4-only element doesn't mean IPv4 can't be turned off. > PROBLEM 1. I could argue that failure to find a DHCP server is a failure > condition. It may not be a fatal error, but more specificity is needed > here. What happens that's bad? > How do you tell the difference between "The DHCP (IPv4) server is down" and > "IPv4 is gone forever"? Exactly. There's no way to tell. And because there's no way to tell, it creates the problems listed here: > PROBLEM 2. Which DHCP messages do you mean? Do you mean in Advertise > messages? DHCPOFFER > Does a server send an Offer if it has no addresses? The problem is not that it has no address. For example, a home router always has an RFC1918 address on its LAN interface. The problem is that it sends an offer even when it has no IPv4 access on its WAN interface. > What about > when there's no IPv4 on the WAN, but IPv4 is still needed for internal > communication? No need for DHCP. Just use link-local IPv4 addresses. [RFC3927] > PROBLEM 3. Separate problem descriptions are needed for home networks and > enterprise networks. First, we're not saying all problems apply to all networks. Second, I'm not sure separating the draft in a home section and an enterprise section would be useful: some problems would apply to both, and some problems would apply to none (home+enterprise != internet). > This document either needs to include a section on "How to know you IPv4 > isn't needed any more" or needs to say explicitly, "The decision about when > to turn off IPv4 is out of scope." As Wes said. Text proposal: > The decision about when to turn off IPv4 is out of scope. This document > merely attempts to enumerate the issues one might encounter if that > decision is made. Thanks, Simon -- DTN made easy, lean, and smart --> http://postellation.viagenie.ca NAT64/DNS64 open-source --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca STUN/TURN server --> http://numb.viagenie.ca From lee@asgard.org Thu Dec 6 08:10:51 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C33521F87E9 for ; Thu, 6 Dec 2012 08:10:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.444 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.444 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.155, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AzmQa4oZ-KJN for ; Thu, 6 Dec 2012 08:10:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from atl4mhob09.myregisteredsite.com (atl4mhob09.myregisteredsite.com [209.17.115.47]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B11221F87D2 for ; Thu, 6 Dec 2012 08:10:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailpod.hostingplatform.com (mail.networksolutionsemail.com [205.178.146.50]) by atl4mhob09.myregisteredsite.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qB6GAn04030467 for ; Thu, 6 Dec 2012 11:10:49 -0500 Received: (qmail 24660 invoked by uid 0); 6 Dec 2012 16:10:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO HDC00042402) (lee@asgard.org@204.235.115.165) by 0 with ESMTPA; 6 Dec 2012 16:10:48 -0000 From: "Lee Howard" To: "'Simon Perreault'" , References: <000001cdc0f5$73d21240$5b7636c0$@asgard.org> <50C08454.6070406@viagenie.ca> In-Reply-To: <50C08454.6070406@viagenie.ca> Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 11:10:48 -0500 Message-ID: <000001cdd3cc$418448f0$c48cdad0$@asgard.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQILGla+lgpfZmbBr+PQew4UxxQesQG8dlxkl4N85lA= Content-Language: en-us Subject: Re: [sunset4] review of sunset4-gap-analysis X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 16:10:51 -0000 > > Related work: the RFCs in this list are lists of RFCs requiring IPv4. > > Have the authors reviewed them to see whether any protocol work is > > required? The documents often point to works-in-progress as of 2004; > > has all of that work been completed? > > As Wes said. What did Wes say? > I just don't want to go there. It was a tremendous amount of work when that review was > being done. But it had a different goal: identifying IPv4-only stuff in protocols. Our goal is > different because we're focusing on the operational side: what prevents people from actually > turning off IPv4. Sometimes it can be related to IPv4-only protocol elements, but often not. > A protocol having an IPv4-only element doesn't mean IPv4 can't be turned off. The "sunset problem" can either be approached by analyzing every operational network for problems it might encounter when turning off IPv4, or by analyzing every network protocol for potential gaps in turning off IPv4. If we try the former, we will miss things. The latter, although time-consuming, is the work that is required. The list has already been made; all we have to do is make sure that the work listed has been completed. This could be farmed out to area directorates, or otherwise broken into small enough pieces that it can be completed. > > PROBLEM 1. I could argue that failure to find a DHCP server is a > > failure condition. It may not be a fatal error, but more specificity > > is needed here. What happens that's bad? > > How do you tell the difference between "The DHCP (IPv4) server is > > down" and > > "IPv4 is gone forever"? > > Exactly. There's no way to tell. And because there's no way to tell, it creates the problems > listed here: > I don't know whether a pointer to that section of that draft, or more specific text describing the two modes ("DHCP down" vs "IPv4 doesn't live here any more") would be preferable. > > PROBLEM 2. Which DHCP messages do you mean? Do you mean in Advertise > > messages? > > DHCPOFFER > > > Does a server send an Offer if it has no addresses? > > The problem is not that it has no address. For example, a home router always has an > RFC1918 address on its LAN interface. The problem is that it sends an offer even when it has > no IPv4 access on its WAN interface. And again, it may be necessary to use rfc1918 space for internal reachability, even when there is no IPv4 WAN/Internet connectivity. How do you know the difference? (next question) > > What about > > when there's no IPv4 on the WAN, but IPv4 is still needed for internal > > communication? > > No need for DHCP. Just use link-local IPv4 addresses. [RFC3927] How does that work in a routed network? For instance, an enterprise network may have twenty LAN segments routed through their headquarters. Some printers may still be IPv4-only. How do you get there with link- local addresses? > > This document either needs to include a section on "How to know you > > IPv4 isn't needed any more" or needs to say explicitly, "The decision > > about when to turn off IPv4 is out of scope." > > As Wes said. > > Text proposal: > > > The decision about when to turn off IPv4 is out of scope. This document > > merely attempts to enumerate the issues one might encounter if that > > decision is made. That helps. We may need the other document ("When is it time?") but I'm not sure the IETF can write it. Lee From cb.list6@gmail.com Wed Dec 19 07:42:47 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A14E21F8866; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 07:42:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.115 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.115 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.116, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GhwZL4NZWlmp; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 07:42:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-la0-f46.google.com (mail-la0-f46.google.com [209.85.215.46]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30CE521F882E; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 07:42:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-la0-f46.google.com with SMTP id p5so1578813lag.19 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 07:42:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=UG1Pr5kk4p3gqrGWzk276NKC+n7XhfTwpMDbsFToOwE=; b=sqRrGVcGl1a/pKkwH7S+m2s1wTCJ3o489tQ0WJ4wwB25W1FFGaYWrHF3NbzsHDCJZk TzhKEHwQ0PBXB60wiEPSFehpXI41Hg1vP/6chPwK6C6Xv9J9SdDFu70yUI8CQqy83VPY 3QsXz3HCNILsNR9QHPPVK/YsBUnxU74eKwG6fgcx/onE4n76ByPAUhcJUYoNF2U7rCst gnBYeFE4OgSOB/OC5YoxIBLLkO9Jwh4AC74fHb6Ao4kwXIUIARjDDf6/29YRud84Gpi1 i72WewXQKRK0i5tI9R78qKT+xiUnNRkAi5oC8Io6ax9lEgds+a2GegzobVznbyYnRXkv 136g== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.144.130 with SMTP id sm2mr5724093lab.49.1355931765063; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 07:42:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.112.44.36 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 07:42:44 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <50CBB3C5.40502@cernet.edu.cn> References: <509CB678.9090402@redpill-linpro.com> <50CBB3C5.40502@cernet.edu.cn> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 07:42:44 -0800 Message-ID: From: Cameron Byrne To: Xing Li Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" , sunset4@ietf.org, Tore Anderson Subject: Re: [sunset4] [v6ops] draft-anderson-siit-dc-00 X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 15:42:47 -0000 On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Xing Li wrote: > Hi, Tore and All, > > Thanks for your interesting draft. I also noticed that you presented this > concept in RIPE64 > https://ripe64.ripe.net/presentations/67-20120417-RIPE64-The_Case_for_IPv6_Only_Data_Centres.pdf > Due to the deployment of VMs in the DC, the depletion of the IPv4 address is > a big issue and your draft presents a solution. I would like to see the > discussion of your draft in v6ops. > > Regards, > > xing +1, i have read the draft and i believe it is something we need to work on. More and more ipv6-only networks are popping up (TMO USA for mobile, TerraStream at DT for fixed line, Red Pill in data center, CERNET2 in backbone ...), and i believe Tore has outlined a sensible path for achieving this in a data centers ...what's more... it is a running code... errr.. network. I urge the chairs for sunset4 and v6ops to make a call on which WG should own it and then take on the task of stewarding it into a WG document. This draft is clearly about running an IPv6 network (so v6ops), but the main feature is shutting off ipv4 (so sunset4) editorial comments sent directly to the author. CB From sarikaya2012@gmail.com Wed Dec 19 11:42:07 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40D6D21F87B2; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 11:42:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.284 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.284 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.286, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4SxQwZMjZptD; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 11:42:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ie0-f177.google.com (mail-ie0-f177.google.com [209.85.223.177]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3366621F8750; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 11:42:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ie0-f177.google.com with SMTP id k13so3421309iea.22 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 11:42:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=KxzfFWduTYf9T71PsSTLzbGk/CIkMtvJe3c7W8tTAHM=; b=f6i4sWDoZOIrgdyPx9yrOMo7dOd2K+Jxc2fHlQnSfDaPIbSIwyL9CLNGUS42p13XqM M+XbCXNG/xvCuE2Gyyxdv2kQ8Yp7xAmZJ4X4rZ4Mq3AFtJ3+SVWvPv/hsEGAktura3Rq jc95KQkXsqtQpYrGptO4de+eKRqcqFbiwHBxUArjNKqAtvX1G7EHpkRl443JmIRKHR6O acI+u4KDveQBP3HhCcvPL+j5OqYE+M47OzGnfyXXPkXHQpf+dzmFf81FPraSsvINGo6r pnkpaGUPX4ob8N94diRk4pv8nccj4Avw7yIHNcaLNIDI8SrrMFc+4j36OMt2Lf7q31lu hTMQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.57.225 with SMTP id l1mr8314576igq.37.1355946125683; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 11:42:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.244.4 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 11:42:05 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <509CB678.9090402@redpill-linpro.com> <50CBB3C5.40502@cernet.edu.cn> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 13:42:05 -0600 Message-ID: From: Behcet Sarikaya To: Cameron Byrne Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae934111527ede704d139cf6f Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" , Xing Li , Tore Anderson , sunset4@ietf.org Subject: Re: [sunset4] [v6ops] draft-anderson-siit-dc-00 X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: sarikaya@ieee.org List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 19:42:07 -0000 --14dae934111527ede704d139cf6f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi Cameron, Please post your comments to the list. Regards, Behcet On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 9:42 AM, Cameron Byrne wrote: > On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Xing Li wrote: > > Hi, Tore and All, > > > > Thanks for your interesting draft. I also noticed that you presented this > > concept in RIPE64 > > > https://ripe64.ripe.net/presentations/67-20120417-RIPE64-The_Case_for_IPv6_Only_Data_Centres.pdf > > Due to the deployment of VMs in the DC, the depletion of the IPv4 > address is > > a big issue and your draft presents a solution. I would like to see the > > discussion of your draft in v6ops. > > > > Regards, > > > > xing > > +1, i have read the draft and i believe it is something we need to > work on. More and more ipv6-only networks are popping up (TMO USA for > mobile, TerraStream at DT for fixed line, Red Pill in data center, > CERNET2 in backbone ...), and i believe Tore has outlined a sensible > path for achieving this in a data centers ...what's more... it is a > running code... errr.. network. > > I urge the chairs for sunset4 and v6ops to make a call on which WG > should own it and then take on the task of stewarding it into a WG > document. This draft is clearly about running an IPv6 network (so > v6ops), but the main feature is shutting off ipv4 (so sunset4) > > editorial comments sent directly to the author. > > CB > _______________________________________________ > sunset4 mailing list > sunset4@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 > --14dae934111527ede704d139cf6f Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Cameron,

Please post your comments to the list.

Regards,
Behcet

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 9:42= AM, Cameron Byrne <cb.list6@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 3:= 18 PM, Xing Li <xing@cernet.edu.cn= > wrote:
> Hi, Tore and All,
>
> Thanks for your interesting draft. I also noticed that you presented t= his
> concept in RIPE64
> https://ripe64.rip= e.net/presentations/67-20120417-RIPE64-The_Case_for_IPv6_Only_Data_Centres.= pdf
> Due to the deployment of VMs in the DC, the depletion of the IPv4 addr= ess is
> a big issue and your draft presents a solution. I would like to see th= e
> discussion of your draft in v6ops.
>
> Regards,
>
> xing

+1, i have read the draft and i believe it is something we need to work on. =A0More and more ipv6-only networks are popping up (TMO USA for mobile, TerraStream at DT for fixed line, Red Pill in data center,
CERNET2 in backbone ...), and i believe Tore has outlined a sensible
path for achieving this in a data centers ...what's more... it is a
running code... errr.. network.

I urge the chairs for sunset4 and v6ops to make a call on which WG
should own it and then take on the task of stewarding it into a WG
document. =A0This draft is clearly about running an IPv6 network (so
v6ops), but the main feature is shutting off ipv4 (so sunset4)

editorial comments sent directly to the author.

CB
_____________________= __________________________
sunset4 mailing list
sunset4@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4

--14dae934111527ede704d139cf6f-- From joelja@bogus.com Sun Dec 23 15:16:35 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD5AD21F8B73; Sun, 23 Dec 2012 15:16:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hLJ-j9wSNUJZ; Sun, 23 Dec 2012 15:16:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A4F221F8B7A; Sun, 23 Dec 2012 15:16:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from joels-MacBook-Air.local (c-71-193-176-225.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [71.193.176.225]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qBNNGL75027026 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 23 Dec 2012 23:16:21 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) Message-ID: <50D790BF.4050701@bogus.com> Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2012 15:16:15 -0800 From: joel jaeggli User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:18.0) Gecko/20121128 Thunderbird/18.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Cameron Byrne References: <509CB678.9090402@redpill-linpro.com> <50CBB3C5.40502@cernet.edu.cn> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Sun, 23 Dec 2012 23:16:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" , Xing Li , Tore Anderson , sunset4@ietf.org Subject: Re: [sunset4] [v6ops] draft-anderson-siit-dc-00 X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2012 23:16:35 -0000 On 12/19/12 7:42 AM, Cameron Byrne wrote: > On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Xing Li wrote: >> Hi, Tore and All, >> >> Thanks for your interesting draft. I also noticed that you presented this >> concept in RIPE64 >> https://ripe64.ripe.net/presentations/67-20120417-RIPE64-The_Case_for_IPv6_Only_Data_Centres.pdf >> Due to the deployment of VMs in the DC, the depletion of the IPv4 address is >> a big issue and your draft presents a solution. I would like to see the >> discussion of your draft in v6ops. >> >> Regards, >> >> xing > +1, i have read the draft and i believe it is something we need to > work on. More and more ipv6-only networks are popping up (TMO USA for > mobile, TerraStream at DT for fixed line, Red Pill in data center, > CERNET2 in backbone ...), and i believe Tore has outlined a sensible > path for achieving this in a data centers ...what's more... it is a > running code... errr.. network. > > I urge the chairs for sunset4 and v6ops to make a call on which WG > should own it and then take on the task of stewarding it into a WG > document. This draft is clearly about running an IPv6 network (so > v6ops), but the main feature is shutting off ipv4 (so sunset4) I do see operating v6 only networks as germain to v6ops. there is clearly an intersection with sunset4 or behave/softwire/et al on how legacy ipv4 needs are supported if at all. > editorial comments sent directly to the author. > > CB > _______________________________________________ > sunset4 mailing list > sunset4@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 > From marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca Sun Dec 23 16:51:22 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 234D321F8BC2; Sun, 23 Dec 2012 16:51:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.218 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.218 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.219, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id a9q9Uz1m+N0a; Sun, 23 Dec 2012 16:51:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from jazz.viagenie.ca (jazz.viagenie.ca [IPv6:2620:0:230:8000::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80FAD21F8B66; Sun, 23 Dec 2012 16:51:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from mb.lan (modemcable180.211-203-24.mc.videotron.ca [24.203.211.180]) by jazz.viagenie.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7C180403AE; Sun, 23 Dec 2012 19:51:15 -0500 (EST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: Marc Blanchet In-Reply-To: <50D790BF.4050701@bogus.com> Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2012 19:51:14 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <73367FC1-8017-42D9-986F-686D44A97AEB@viagenie.ca> References: <509CB678.9090402@redpill-linpro.com> <50CBB3C5.40502@cernet.edu.cn> <50D790BF.4050701@bogus.com> To: joel jaeggli X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283) Cc: sunset4@ietf.org, Cameron Byrne , Xing Li , "v6ops@ietf.org" , Tore Anderson Subject: Re: [sunset4] [v6ops] draft-anderson-siit-dc-00 X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 00:51:22 -0000 Le 2012-12-23 =E0 18:16, joel jaeggli a =E9crit : >=20 > On 12/19/12 7:42 AM, Cameron Byrne wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Xing Li wrote: >>> Hi, Tore and All, >>>=20 >>> Thanks for your interesting draft. I also noticed that you presented = this >>> concept in RIPE64 >>> = https://ripe64.ripe.net/presentations/67-20120417-RIPE64-The_Case_for_IPv6= _Only_Data_Centres.pdf >>> Due to the deployment of VMs in the DC, the depletion of the IPv4 = address is >>> a big issue and your draft presents a solution. I would like to see = the >>> discussion of your draft in v6ops. >>>=20 >>> Regards, >>>=20 >>> xing >> +1, i have read the draft and i believe it is something we need to >> work on. More and more ipv6-only networks are popping up (TMO USA = for >> mobile, TerraStream at DT for fixed line, Red Pill in data center, >> CERNET2 in backbone ...), and i believe Tore has outlined a sensible >> path for achieving this in a data centers ...what's more... it is a >> running code... errr.. network. >>=20 >> I urge the chairs for sunset4 and v6ops to make a call on which WG >> should own it and then take on the task of stewarding it into a WG >> document. This draft is clearly about running an IPv6 network (so >> v6ops), but the main feature is shutting off ipv4 (so sunset4) > I do see operating v6 only networks as germain to v6ops. there is = clearly an intersection with sunset4 or behave/softwire/et al on how = legacy ipv4 needs are supported if at all. right. but sunset4 may do protocol work. Marc. >> editorial comments sent directly to the author. >>=20 >> CB >> _______________________________________________ >> sunset4 mailing list >> sunset4@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 >>=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > sunset4 mailing list > sunset4@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4