From hiroa-ha@is.naist.jp Wed Jul 10 01:06:27 2013 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 F114121F9D95 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 01:06:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.09 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eAzCeqb1tGBf for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 01:06:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailrelay21.naist.jp (mailrelay21.naist.jp [163.221.80.71]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4DD021F9D8F for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 01:06:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailpost21.naist.jp (mailscan21.naist.jp [163.221.80.58]) by mailrelay21.naist.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7DCB5E0 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 17:06:16 +0900 (JST) Received: from [163.221.126.125] (naist-wavenet126-125.naist.jp [163.221.126.125]) by mailpost21.naist.jp (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A08E25DF for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 17:06:16 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <51DD15EE.7090804@is.naist.jp> Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 17:06:06 +0900 From: Hiroaki Hazeyama User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sunset4@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-MML: No X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1392-6.8.0.1017-20006.005 X-TM-AS-Result: No-0.234-5.0-31-10 X-imss-scan-details: No-0.234-5.0-31-10 X-TMASE-MatchedRID: kidA6vpcc7hCXIGdsOwlUh5+URxv1WlBcmsHQK7cMOdhDkba7HJ41LGH KH3RtSbPk236Dqf8Vvs5ze2drk/BuXBliJqQzff8JLEgWUxgq8K063Wh9WVqggcDrh9FuQWbeeF AQHoVNZJvFzyvAB/ijmrz/G/ZSbVq+gtHj7OwNO1YDuIRWpqxhvUruP66blxDC9rzb7CClXwfJx 72aLm1IXg+asMzPMTfNjPNPmAX/fynosDHXitXVzQKAFXGxTU02uUYFm6eNcZATLMWrOUceFuiK Ft7/vYEor/sAyudYPghRL+eMRd+nQUn0Ye0cSRIVcr204P67pw= Subject: [sunset4] New draft: draft-hazeyama-sunset4-dns-a-filter-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, 10 Jul 2013 08:06:27 -0000 Hi all, we posted a new draft http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hazeyama-sunset4-dns-a-filter-00 according to the comments on ietf 86 orland, this memo describes only the technical proposal part of DNS A record filtering on draft-hiromi-sunset4-termination-ipv4-00. would be interesting to hear your feedback. ---- Hiroaki Hazeyama From Ted.Lemon@nominum.com Wed Jul 10 07:32:34 2013 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 84F5721F9E5C for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 07:32:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vcEFmDlPx6Up for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 07:32:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exprod7og103.obsmtp.com (exprod7og103.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.159]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CFF011E8178 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 07:32:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shell-too.nominum.com ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob103.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUd1wd7WMqPiPL5/N/zs5G0XMO7M55XOR@postini.com; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 07:32:23 PDT Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC46B1B8240 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 07:32:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-02.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E43BE190052; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 07:32:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Ted.Lemon@nominum.com) Received: from MBX-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.133]) by CAS-02.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.132]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 07:32:17 -0700 From: Ted Lemon To: Hiroaki Hazeyama Thread-Topic: [sunset4] New draft: draft-hazeyama-sunset4-dns-a-filter-00 Thread-Index: AQHOfURhWGnUaiA2WkqfsHJuQEe+E5leb1wA Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 14:32:16 +0000 Message-ID: <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630775208482@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> References: <51DD15EE.7090804@is.naist.jp> In-Reply-To: <51DD15EE.7090804@is.naist.jp> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [192.168.1.10] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "" Subject: Re: [sunset4] New draft: draft-hazeyama-sunset4-dns-a-filter-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, 10 Jul 2013 14:32:34 -0000 On Jul 10, 2013, at 4:06 AM, Hiroaki Hazeyama wrote: > according to the comments on ietf 86 orland, > this memo describes only the technical proposal part of DNS A record > filtering on draft-hiromi-sunset4-termination-ipv4-00. An IPv6-only node by definition doesn't have IPv4, so an A record would go = unused, and therefore causes no harm. A dual-stack node with broken IPv4 = would fail, so an A record would cause harm in this case. However, the wa= y you've chosen to mitigate the harm looks like it would break DNSSEC valid= ation; I see no mention of this in the document. I think a solution to a = broken network that breaks DNSSEC validation is the wrong way to go. Is it possible to implement this in a way that doesn't break DNSSEC validat= ion? From hiroa-ha@is.naist.jp Wed Jul 10 16:23:33 2013 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 2A8D921F9D34 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 16:23:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.09 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pXaTEpeu2DAG for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 16:23:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailrelay22.naist.jp (mailrelay22.naist.jp [163.221.80.91]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 029B921F9D15 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 16:23:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailpost22.naist.jp (mailscan22.naist.jp [163.221.80.59]) by mailrelay22.naist.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CD7D4E1 for ; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 08:22:51 +0900 (JST) Received: from [163.221.52.172] (isa3-dhcp-52-172.naist.jp [163.221.52.172]) by mailpost22.naist.jp (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 14A304E0 for ; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 08:22:51 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <51DDECC6.5090609@is.naist.jp> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 08:22:46 +0900 From: Hiroaki Hazeyama User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sunset4@ietf.org References: <51DD15EE.7090804@is.naist.jp> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630775208482@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> In-Reply-To: <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630775208482@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-MML: No X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1392-6.8.0.1017-20008.003 X-TM-AS-Result: No--29.997-5.0-31-10 X-imss-scan-details: No--29.997-5.0-31-10 X-TMASE-MatchedRID: zPCJ1+vwQ/tCXIGdsOwlUh5+URxv1WlBWyQijpt1UQkzFWOYrWw6A6iZ aOZUGVmqAKF12TsXeQ8DZOfqTvwcefVfplHf3Y2hVtZNMIeE5PEh/JA0dHadptFAL/v/kWNuQnX BJk39rb9XQY3DqLB3uOU9Y5l2egV84WiSiOGtcv/87vS8PQu3wHJhHDpcdR+EHFSQk97VYGpa4r F3/sBeKxixhmyPH7gxYxvCGWvQvaIO1mBHjZk2Z8WUKBjERoYTfiuvKi9huabJ2i9a4v4pV9s1C HzkaGoiEVtxaPoSt7ASBMuDRJ2LpTfO5GuBbEYYEzQnFLEeMUkwziKhrKXi3XnVOpTXYxva6Whi DOOieuyQZS2ujCtcuA== Subject: Re: [sunset4] New draft: draft-hazeyama-sunset4-dns-a-filter-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, 10 Jul 2013 23:23:33 -0000 Thank you ted for your comment. I will add the consideration about the DNSSEC in the next version. Our current solution will break the DNSSEC validation because the current DNS64/NAT64 does not have the affinity with DNSSEC validation. Unfortunatelly, I have no idea how to keep the DNSSEC validation on the DNS64/NAT64 environment at the moment. Also, I'd like to know the possible way or implementation to keep DNSSEC validation in DNS64/NAT64 environment. If you know some ideas or ways, please let me know. Regards, ---- hazeyama (2013/07/10 23:32), Ted Lemon wrote: > On Jul 10, 2013, at 4:06 AM, Hiroaki Hazeyama wrote: >> according to the comments on ietf 86 orland, >> this memo describes only the technical proposal part of DNS A record >> filtering on draft-hiromi-sunset4-termination-ipv4-00. > > An IPv6-only node by definition doesn't have IPv4, so an A record would go unused, and therefore causes no harm. A dual-stack node with broken IPv4 would fail, so an A record would cause harm in this case. However, the way you've chosen to mitigate the harm looks like it would break DNSSEC validation; I see no mention of this in the document. I think a solution to a broken network that breaks DNSSEC validation is the wrong way to go. > > Is it possible to implement this in a way that doesn't break DNSSEC validation? > > _______________________________________________ > sunset4 mailing list > sunset4@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 > From Ted.Lemon@nominum.com Wed Jul 10 17:02:51 2013 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 EF44F11E80D1 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 17:02:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FMwhLbsizDrK for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 17:02:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exprod7og121.obsmtp.com (exprod7og121.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47B0E21F9A48 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 17:02:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shell-too.nominum.com ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob121.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUd32JAI+TMW8M2CeAt+hKSL/b0h7EMC2@postini.com; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 17:02:45 PDT Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A46A41B8249 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 17:02:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-01.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.131]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 58A74190052; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 17:02:43 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Ted.Lemon@nominum.com) Received: from MBX-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.133]) by CAS-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.131]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 17:02:43 -0700 From: Ted Lemon To: Hiroaki Hazeyama Thread-Topic: [sunset4] New draft: draft-hazeyama-sunset4-dns-a-filter-00 Thread-Index: AQHOfURhWGnUaiA2WkqfsHJuQEe+E5leb1wAgACUOACAAAspAA== Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 00:02:43 +0000 Message-ID: <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307752098DF@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> References: <51DD15EE.7090804@is.naist.jp> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630775208482@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <51DDECC6.5090609@is.naist.jp> In-Reply-To: <51DDECC6.5090609@is.naist.jp> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [192.168.1.10] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <7EB50DF53C163F418170287ACA8B7C58@nominum.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "" Subject: Re: [sunset4] New draft: draft-hazeyama-sunset4-dns-a-filter-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: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 00:02:52 -0000 On Jul 10, 2013, at 7:22 PM, Hiroaki Hazeyama wrote: > Unfortunatelly, I have no idea how to keep the DNSSEC validation > on the DNS64/NAT64 environment at the moment. Also, I'd like to know the = possible way or implementation to keep DNSSEC validation in DNS64/NAT64 env= ironment. If you know some ideas or ways, please let me know. The way you do DNSSEC validation with DNS64 is to have a trusted path betwe= en the stub resolver and the DNS64 resolver. The DNS64 resolver does the = validation on the original answer, and then returns a synthesized answer (i= f needed) with the AD bit set to indicate that the data has been authentica= ted. If you want to do validation locally, you have to do the DNS64 synth= esis locally as well. This is described in section 6.2 of RFC 6147. Have you considered the implications of section 6.1 of RFC6147 on your prop= osal? I think it's a problem. From hiroa-ha@is.naist.jp Wed Jul 10 17:42:56 2013 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 D409321F9AC9 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 17:42:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.09 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PGrj7rl-m28u for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 17:42:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailrelay21.naist.jp (mailrelay21.naist.jp [163.221.80.71]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00A3521F9AC1 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 17:42:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailpost21.naist.jp (mailscan21.naist.jp [163.221.80.58]) by mailrelay21.naist.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C605D06; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 09:42:48 +0900 (JST) Received: from [IPv6:2001:200:16a:1010:30a5:e3cc:cb91:942] (unknown [IPv6:2001:200:16a:1010:30a5:e3cc:cb91:942]) by mailpost21.naist.jp (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5721ED05; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 09:42:48 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <51DDFF81.2020007@is.naist.jp> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 09:42:41 +0900 From: Hiroaki Hazeyama User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ted Lemon References: <51DD15EE.7090804@is.naist.jp> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630775208482@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <51DDECC6.5090609@is.naist.jp> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307752098DF@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> In-Reply-To: <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307752098DF@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-MML: No X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1392-6.8.0.1017-20008.003 X-TM-AS-Result: No--17.259-5.0-31-10 X-imss-scan-details: No--17.259-5.0-31-10 X-TMASE-MatchedRID: I5Fk1qs03HZCXIGdsOwlUh5+URxv1WlBWyQijpt1UQlFcdOPjZ3+rMkU hKWc+gwPi8O7QEQqsU5ej92X5tPLAfVfplHf3Y2hVtZNMIeE5PEh/JA0dHadplCnGPsYcdSlmLk REQ/0nFPIx0yjKcN9PrT5ahjTsNgsE2ZRbV2rc3GdtRmRhPNchjUdb7Xj12jeAOrNpiFyN5D3a1 M/dirxUCmqJY7+QFbXpLxllhlod9g7E753hz6GdXYI24jNoeLhpQH4ogtVQP2safcFLFlU1PbDH OYOZbX41YbKWrFj+qi5xNoo7cjvv+9c69BWUTGwz/zMrlZU/wtLSJIbrHIhlz5ZVPWbQwzPvECL uM+h4RB+3BndfXUhXQ== Cc: "" Subject: Re: [sunset4] New draft: draft-hazeyama-sunset4-dns-a-filter-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: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 00:42:57 -0000 Ted, (2013/07/11 9:02), Ted Lemon wrote: > On Jul 10, 2013, at 7:22 PM, Hiroaki Hazeyama wrote: >> Unfortunatelly, I have no idea how to keep the DNSSEC validation >> on the DNS64/NAT64 environment at the moment. Also, I'd like to know the possible way or implementation to keep DNSSEC validation in DNS64/NAT64 environment. If you know some ideas or ways, please let me know. > > The way you do DNSSEC validation with DNS64 is to have a trusted path between the stub resolver and the DNS64 resolver. The DNS64 resolver does the validation on the original answer, and then returns a synthesized answer (if needed) with the AD bit set to indicate that the data has been authenticated. If you want to do validation locally, you have to do the DNS64 synthesis locally as well. This is described in section 6.2 of RFC 6147. > I'm not a specialist of DNSSEC, and I had a bit wrong information about DNSSEC. Anyway, thank you to inform the proper information. > Have you considered the implications of section 6.1 of RFC6147 on your proposal? I think it's a problem. > I think we met such problem in section 6.1 of RFC6147 in a past wide camp. Some DNS returned A record response to the AAAA record query from our DNS64, then the DNS64 cannot fallback to perform the sythesis. Is this the same problem that you worry about ? ---- hazeyama From Ted.Lemon@nominum.com Wed Jul 10 18:12:29 2013 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 C6FF511E80AE for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 18:12:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IucY0UPWgBDP for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 18:12:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exprod7og126.obsmtp.com (exprod7og126.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.206]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CC7E11E80A2 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 18:12:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shell-too.nominum.com ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob126.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUd4GPtoBlISo7gnafOFmRMva6Ea6R4Xi@postini.com; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 18:12:23 PDT Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E1101B8248 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 18:11:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-01.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.131]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 247AB190052; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 18:11:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Ted.Lemon@nominum.com) Received: from MBX-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.133]) by CAS-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.131]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 18:11:25 -0700 From: Ted Lemon To: Hiroaki Hazeyama Thread-Topic: [sunset4] New draft: draft-hazeyama-sunset4-dns-a-filter-00 Thread-Index: AQHOfURhWGnUaiA2WkqfsHJuQEe+E5leb1wAgACUOACAAAspAIAACyyAgAAIBgA= Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 01:11:24 +0000 Message-ID: <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630775209A5A@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> References: <51DD15EE.7090804@is.naist.jp> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630775208482@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <51DDECC6.5090609@is.naist.jp> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307752098DF@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <51DDFF81.2020007@is.naist.jp> In-Reply-To: <51DDFF81.2020007@is.naist.jp> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [192.168.1.10] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "" Subject: Re: [sunset4] New draft: draft-hazeyama-sunset4-dns-a-filter-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: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 01:12:29 -0000 On Jul 10, 2013, at 8:42 PM, Hiroaki Hazeyama wrote: > Some DNS returned A record response to the AAAA record query from our DNS= 64, then the DNS64 cannot fallback to perform the sythesis. No, this is somewhat expected behavior in certain implementations. DNS64 = should be filtering out the AAAA records, but unfortunately RFC 6147 didn't= anticipate this problem. > Is this the same problem that you worry about ? The problem I was referring to is the problem where your DNS resolver downs= tream of the DNS64 resolver gets A records as glue, and then returns them a= s answers to queries from stub resolvers. On the whole, I would really like to encourage you to re-think this archite= cture as a simple update to RFC 6147 to address the rogue A record problem = there, instead of the rather complicated architecture that you've described= . It may be that I don't understand the motivation for the more complicat= ed problem, but to me it looks like the DNS A record filter proxy is unnece= ssary=97you just need to specify that the DNS64 resolver does A record filt= ering. From gsalguei@cisco.com Thu Jul 11 23:56:12 2013 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 83AC721F9D0D for ; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 23:56:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.382 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.382 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.217, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1mCmppWHNtAr for ; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 23:56:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from av-tac-rtp.cisco.com (av-tac-rtp.cisco.com [64.102.19.209]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58AF921F9C5A for ; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 23:56:08 -0700 (PDT) X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned Received: from chook.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by av-tac-rtp.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r6C6u7tS010232 for ; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 02:56:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rtp-gsalguei-8914.cisco.com (rtp-gsalguei-8914.cisco.com [10.116.132.53]) by chook.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r6C6u4Rn022338; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 02:56:04 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\)) From: Gonzalo Salgueiro In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 02:56:03 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508) Cc: "draft-klatsky-dispatch-ipv6-impact-ipv4@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sunset4] Interoperability Impacts of IPv6 Interworking with Existing IPv4 SIP Implementations 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: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 06:56:12 -0000 A friendly reminder that a new version (-01) of this draft has been = posted based on feedback received by the DISPATCH WG. The new version = can be found here: Htmlized: = http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-klatsky-dispatch-ipv6-impact-ipv4-01 Diff: = http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-klatsky-dispatch-ipv6-impact-ipv4= -01 Any comments/feedback are welcomed and appreciated. Cheers, Gonzalo On Jun 7, 2013, at 9:30 PM, "Shekh-Yusef, Rifaat (Rifaat)" = wrote: > Hi, > =20 > As part of the SIP Forum=92s =93SIP Over IPv6=94 group, we have = recently submitted the following document to the DISPATCH mailing list = in the IETF RAI area. > The document describes the impact of IPv6 on existing IPv4 SIP User = Agents. > = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-klatsky-dispatch-ipv6-impact-ipv4/ > =20 > We would appreciate it if you review the draft and provide us with = your feedback on this mailing list or on the DISPATCH mailing list. > =20 > Regards, > Rifaat > =20 From phdgang@gmail.com Sun Jul 14 20:06:04 2013 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 46AAB21F9D8E for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 20:06:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.487 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.487 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.113, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Wm0YVaPifesV for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 20:06:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qc0-x232.google.com (mail-qc0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3F5621F9D8D for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 20:06:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qc0-f178.google.com with SMTP id c11so5969912qcv.37 for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 20:06:03 -0700 (PDT) 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 :content-type; bh=EdC+6zX61lts1esEoyhu4OpTTa2hvhVYmpsUOpzP6aU=; b=omeBCpUk8QBSLqdhanaFAjQSTyEgRUTOzxI9FXMa1amSQiNFM0NnIXMt+svbRPc0OL p/vcMNRWHCl2/THs8OcpjvxbT0VrLq70sGdBrk2aIWUYCG/qc3uKUMOuKsptbS+z3wRY dTIMDxO2fQEUIs3+rJbuOgg/M1pu3iFRwCyStzasiR2c94TwRl+UpxU510khcj4lRldo o4hIJG+AipZJuZN4FaNDPYoriFu/Rp/TyLkwm6t8fpy/g3JLZxnz47G7c6fcnqadLhaf Xi0On5SZ87DIXJhmuYZC+GGm4gW2pV1MYURsP7Ch8UTRTUXsRgmjNcGbZ94ojfRILEMw ra5g== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.94.1 with SMTP id x1mr49097288qam.54.1373857562954; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 20:06:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.224.182.74 with HTTP; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 20:06:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20130714161333.13130.21891.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <20130714161333.13130.21891.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 11:06:02 +0800 Message-ID: From: GangChen To: "sunset4@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: [sunset4] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation-02.txt 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, 15 Jul 2013 03:06:04 -0000 wg, I submitted a new version of draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation The updates incorporated The comments on the previous meeting. Several testing results are described help to evaluate/verify/complete the statements. Your further reviews/comments are appreciated. BRs Gang ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: internet-drafts@ietf.org Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 09:13:33 -0700 Subject: I-D Action: draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation-02.txt To: i-d-announce@ietf.org A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : Analysis of NAT64 Port Allocation Method Author(s) : Gang Chen Filename : draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation-02.txt Pages : 11 Date : 2013-07-14 Abstract: The document enumerates methods of port assignment in CGN contexts, more focusing on a NAT64 environment. The analysis categorizes the different methods with several key features. The uses of existing protocols are further described corresponding to those features. This memo also states the port-usage experiences, relevant findings, evaluations and workarounds. It's expected the document could provide an informative base line to help operators choosing a proper method. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation-02 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation-02 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ _______________________________________________ I-D-Announce mailing list I-D-Announce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt From simon.perreault@viagenie.ca Mon Jul 15 04:46:45 2013 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 ADF2821E80A9 for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 04:46:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.505 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.505 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.094, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JX9wN+lsiOsT for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 04:46:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jazz.viagenie.ca (jazz.viagenie.ca [IPv6:2620:0:230:8000::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A66FD21E809E for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 04:46:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (h228.viagenie.ca [206.123.31.228]) by jazz.viagenie.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 05A92403FF for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 07:46:40 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <51E3E122.2090101@viagenie.ca> Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 13:46:42 +0200 From: Simon Perreault User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sunset4@ietf.org References: <20130715114441.3493.76987.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20130715114441.3493.76987.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <20130715114441.3493.76987.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [sunset4] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-perreault-sunset4-noipv4-03.txt 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, 15 Jul 2013 11:46:45 -0000 This update adds a No-IPv4 RA option with the same semantics as the DHCPv6 one, as discussed in IETF 86. Simon -------- Message original -------- Sujet: New Version Notification for draft-perreault-sunset4-noipv4-03.txt Date : Mon, 15 Jul 2013 04:44:41 -0700 De : internet-drafts@ietf.org Pour : Tina Tsou , Tianle Yang , Wes George , Wesley George , Simon Perreault A new version of I-D, draft-perreault-sunset4-noipv4-03.txt has been successfully submitted by Simon Perreault and posted to the IETF repository. Filename: draft-perreault-sunset4-noipv4 Revision: 03 Title: Turning off IPv4 Using DHCPv6 or Router Advertisements Creation date: 2013-07-15 Group: Individual Submission Number of pages: 13 URL: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-perreault-sunset4-noipv4-03.txt Status: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-perreault-sunset4-noipv4 Htmlized: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-perreault-sunset4-noipv4-03 Diff: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-perreault-sunset4-noipv4-03 Abstract: This memo defines a new DHCPv6 option and a new Router Advertisement option for indicating to a dual-stack host or router that IPv4 is to be turned off. The IETF Secretariat From internet-drafts@ietf.org Mon Jul 15 05:16:07 2013 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 8FEAB21E80BB; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 05:16:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.534 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.534 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.066, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nXhp7h4FGu1g; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 05:16:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C96C621E80B5; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 05:16:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.51.p2 Message-ID: <20130715121606.30521.73508.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 05:16:06 -0700 Cc: sunset4@ietf.org Subject: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-03.txt 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, 15 Jul 2013 12:16:07 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Sunsetting IPv4 Working Group of the IETF. Title : Gap Analysis for IPv4 Sunset Author(s) : Jean-Philippe Dionne Simon Perreault Tina Tsou Cathy Zhou Filename : draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-03.txt Pages : 9 Date : 2013-07-15 Abstract: Sunsetting IPv4 refers to the process of turning off IPv4 definitively. It can be seen as the final phase of the migration to IPv6. This memo enumerates difficulties arising when sunsetting IPv4, and identifies the gaps requiring additional work. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-03 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-03 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From simon.perreault@viagenie.ca Mon Jul 15 05:19:57 2013 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 BFCB511E80EE for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 05:19:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.511 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.088, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cetGKO44L+Uu for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 05:19:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jazz.viagenie.ca (jazz.viagenie.ca [IPv6:2620:0:230:8000::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 712E611E80EA for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 05:19:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (h228.viagenie.ca [206.123.31.228]) by jazz.viagenie.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DE5FF403FF for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 08:19:55 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <51E3E8ED.3050306@viagenie.ca> Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 14:19:57 +0200 From: Simon Perreault User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sunset4@ietf.org References: <20130715121606.30521.73508.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20130715121606.30521.73508.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-03.txt 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, 15 Jul 2013 12:19:58 -0000 Change log: - Identified a new problem with Link-Local IPv4 addresses, the "ARP for everything" problem. We refer to draft-yourtchenko-ipv6-disable-ipv4-proxyarp for the details. - Moved all the solution ideas to an appendix, as suggested at IETF 86. - Security Considerations are no longer "TODO". Simon Le 2013-07-15 14:16, internet-drafts@ietf.org a écrit : > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. > This draft is a work item of the Sunsetting IPv4 Working Group of the IETF. > > Title : Gap Analysis for IPv4 Sunset > Author(s) : Jean-Philippe Dionne > Simon Perreault > Tina Tsou > Cathy Zhou > Filename : draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-03.txt > Pages : 9 > Date : 2013-07-15 > > Abstract: > Sunsetting IPv4 refers to the process of turning off IPv4 > definitively. It can be seen as the final phase of the migration to > IPv6. This memo enumerates difficulties arising when sunsetting > IPv4, and identifies the gaps requiring additional work. > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis > > There's also a htmlized version available at: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-03 > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-03 > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > _______________________________________________ > sunset4 mailing list > sunset4@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 > From wesley.george@twcable.com Mon Jul 15 08:13:30 2013 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 665DB21F9B9D for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 08:13:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.54 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.54 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.078, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Irh4hDJSt-US for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 08:13:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cdcipgw02.twcable.com (cdcipgw02.twcable.com [165.237.91.111]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8E5611E812C for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 08:13:25 -0700 (PDT) X-SENDER-IP: 10.136.163.10 X-SENDER-REPUTATION: None X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,669,1367985600"; d="scan'208,217";a="27539466" Received: from unknown (HELO PRVPEXHUB01.corp.twcable.com) ([10.136.163.10]) by cdcipgw02.twcable.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-MD5; 15 Jul 2013 11:12:57 -0400 Received: from PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.78]) by PRVPEXHUB01.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.10]) with mapi; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 11:13:19 -0400 From: "George, Wes" To: "sunset4@ietf.org" , "dhc@ietf.org" Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 11:13:19 -0400 Thread-Topic: Sunset4/DHC joint meeting, Wednesday Session III Thread-Index: Ac6BbdUQ+RUEhhZXTxWpO1ZYEn7g6g== Message-ID: <2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD5923043882B61A@PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD5923043882B61APRVPEXVS15cor_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "draft-perreault-sunset4-noipv4@tools.ietf.org" , "draft-wing-dhc-dns-reconfigure@tools.ietf.org" , "sunset4-chairs@tools.ietf.org" , "dhc-chairs@tools.ietf.org" , "int-ads@tools.ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-ipv6@tools.ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-dhc-v4configuration@tools.ietf.org" Subject: [sunset4] Sunset4/DHC joint meeting, Wednesday Session III 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, 15 Jul 2013 15:13:30 -0000 --_000_2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD5923043882B61APRVPEXVS15cor_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable All - There will be a joint meeting at IETF 87 between Sunset4 and DHC from 1620-= 1720 Wednesday (the second hour of Sunset4's meeting time). The chairs of b= oth groups and the IntArea ADs met at IETF in Orlando to discuss the potent= ial overlap between some work going on in DHC (provisioning IPv4 over IPv6 = or DHCPv4 over DHCPv6) and some work going on in Sunset4 to govern signalin= g end networks and hosts about the absence or presence of IPv4 connectivity= , as well as preferences about which address family to use for which set of= traffic. We agreed that it would be useful to discuss these things togethe= r, to ensure that we are coordinating well between the groups' efforts, as = well as to get a wider group of people thinking about the combined problem = set and reviewing the associated drafts. Based on those initial discussions, the chairs have identified a few drafts= that are of interest to both groups, and that is what generated the draft = agenda for the meeting. The meeting materials, including the agenda, and an introduction slide dec= k discussing the goals of the joint session are available for review under = Sunset4's meeting materials area. Agenda: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/87/agenda/agenda-87-sunset4 (see se= cond half) Intro Presentation: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/87/slides/slides-87-sun= set4-0.pdf Please review and bash, especially if you feel after reviewing the intro sl= ides that there are additional drafts that should be discussed. The timeslo= ts for discussing the listed drafts are not intended to be a full introduct= ion of the draft for those unfamiliar with it. Rather, this is meant to be = the point at which we discuss the interaction between the two groups and co= ordination of changes to DHCP as proposed. We encourage the authors to put = together a one slide summary, along with a slide or two with discussion que= stions. Thanks, Wes George, Sunset4 co-chair Anything below this line has been added by my company's mail server, I have= no control over it. ----------- ________________________________ This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable propri= etary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyrig= ht belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the u= se of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the= intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissem= ination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents= of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawf= ul. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender imm= ediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail an= d any printout. --_000_2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD5923043882B61APRVPEXVS15cor_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

All –

 

There will be a joint meeting at IETF 87 between Sun= set4 and DHC from 1620-1720 Wednesday (the second hour of Sunset4’s m= eeting time). The chairs of both groups and the IntArea ADs met at IETF in = Orlando to discuss the potential overlap between some work going on in DHC (provisioning IPv4 over IPv6 or DHCPv4 o= ver DHCPv6) and some work going on in Sunset4 to govern signaling end netwo= rks and hosts about the absence or presence of IPv4 connectivity, as well a= s preferences about which address family to use for which set of traffic. We agreed that it would be useful = to discuss these things together, to ensure that we are coordinating well b= etween the groups’ efforts, as well as to get a wider group of people= thinking about the combined problem set and reviewing the associated drafts.

 

Based on those initial discussions, the chairs have = identified a few drafts that are of interest to both groups, and that is wh= at generated the draft agenda for the meeting.

The meeting materials, including the agenda, and&nbs= p; an introduction slide deck discussing the goals of the joint session are= available for review under Sunset4’s meeting materials area.

Agenda: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/87/agenda/agenda-87-sunset4 (see second= half)

Intro Presentation: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/87/slides/slides-87-sunset4-0.pdf<= /o:p>

 

Please review and bash, especially if you feel after= reviewing the intro slides that there are additional drafts that should be= discussed. The timeslots for discussing the listed drafts are not intended= to be a full introduction of the draft for those unfamiliar with it. Rather, this is meant to be the point = at which we discuss the interaction between the two groups and coordination= of changes to DHCP as proposed. We encourage the authors to put together a= one slide summary, along with a slide or two with discussion questions.

 

Thanks,

 

Wes George, Sunset4 co-chair

 

Anything below this li= ne has been added by my company’s mail server, I have no control over= it.

-----------=


This E-mail and any of its a= ttachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is = privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner = Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you a= re not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that = any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to th= e contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have receiv= ed this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanent= ly delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.
 --_000_2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD5923043882B61APRVPEXVS15cor_-- From wesley.george@twcable.com Mon Jul 15 08:14:26 2013 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 C063E21E8098 for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 08:14:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.532 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.070, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hbYOWC27MslI for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 08:14:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cdcipgw01.twcable.com (cdcipgw01.twcable.com [165.237.91.110]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A003F21E80B7 for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 08:14:18 -0700 (PDT) X-SENDER-IP: 10.136.163.14 X-SENDER-REPUTATION: None X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,669,1367985600"; d="scan'208,217";a="33667951" Received: from unknown (HELO PRVPEXHUB05.corp.twcable.com) ([10.136.163.14]) by cdcipgw01.twcable.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-MD5; 15 Jul 2013 11:14:02 -0400 Received: from PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.78]) by PRVPEXHUB05.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.14]) with mapi; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 11:14:17 -0400 From: "George, Wes" To: "sunset4@ietf.org" Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 11:14:16 -0400 Thread-Topic: Draft agenda posted Thread-Index: Ac6BbfirLa4wSbJNS5GvsqFSeAjmOw== Message-ID: <2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD5923043882B623@PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD5923043882B623PRVPEXVS15cor_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [sunset4] Draft agenda posted 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, 15 Jul 2013 15:14:26 -0000 --_000_2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD5923043882B623PRVPEXVS15cor_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable As you can see from my previous email, the draft agenda has been posted. Pl= ease review and comment. Thanks, Wes Anything below this line has been added by my company's mail server, I have= no control over it. ----------- ________________________________ This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable propri= etary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyrig= ht belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the u= se of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the= intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissem= ination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents= of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawf= ul. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender imm= ediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail an= d any printout. --_000_2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD5923043882B623PRVPEXVS15cor_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

As you can see from my previous email, the draft age= nda has been posted. Please review and comment.

 

Thanks,

 

Wes

 

Anything below this li= ne has been added by my company’s mail server, I have no control over= it.

-----------=

 


This E-mail and any of its a= ttachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is = privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner = Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you a= re not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that = any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to th= e contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have receiv= ed this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanent= ly delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.
 --_000_2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD5923043882B623PRVPEXVS15cor_-- From wesley.george@twcable.com Tue Jul 23 08:37:10 2013 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 5761A11E825C for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 08:37:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.963 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.963 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.500, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2KByZMQAXr+K for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 08:37:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cdpipgw01.twcable.com (cdpipgw01.twcable.com [165.237.59.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27D9511E8101 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 08:37:06 -0700 (PDT) X-SENDER-IP: 10.136.163.15 X-SENDER-REPUTATION: None X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,728,1367985600"; d="scan'208";a="111755151" Received: from unknown (HELO PRVPEXHUB06.corp.twcable.com) ([10.136.163.15]) by cdpipgw01.twcable.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-MD5; 23 Jul 2013 11:32:31 -0400 Received: from PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.78]) by PRVPEXHUB06.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.15]) with mapi; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 11:33:37 -0400 From: "George, Wes" To: GangChen , "sunset4@ietf.org" Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 11:33:36 -0400 Thread-Topic: [sunset4] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation-02.txt Thread-Index: Ac6BCD/I5O/kxdA7R0eqNFwtL4Ze7gGr8dRw Message-ID: <2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD592304391117CD@PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com> References: <20130714161333.13130.21891.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [sunset4] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation-02.txt 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: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 15:37:10 -0000 A couple of quick comments on Section 2: " With the merits of simplicity and efficiency, NAT64 will be likely deployed." --I think you're asserting that NAT64 is simple and efficient, but this beg= s the question, "in comparison to what, and using what criteria?" I would e= ither remove this phrase (it's mainly just an introductory transition), or = provide supporting information to better advocate for NAT64. " There was a testing on the comparison of port consumption on NAT64 and NAT44." --Citation, please? Thanks, Wes, as an individual. > -----Original Message----- > From: sunset4-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sunset4-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of GangChen > Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 11:06 PM > To: sunset4@ietf.org > Subject: [sunset4] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port- > allocation-02.txt > > wg, > > I submitted a new version of draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation > The updates incorporated The comments on the previous meeting. > Several testing results are described help to evaluate/verify/complete > the statements. > > Your further reviews/comments are appreciated. > > BRs > > Gang > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org > Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 09:13:33 -0700 > Subject: I-D Action: draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation-02.txt > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > > > Title : Analysis of NAT64 Port Allocation Method > Author(s) : Gang Chen > Filename : draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation-02.txt > Pages : 11 > Date : 2013-07-14 > > Abstract: > The document enumerates methods of port assignment in CGN contexts, > more focusing on a NAT64 environment. The analysis categorizes the > different methods with several key features. The uses of existing > protocols are further described corresponding to those features. > This memo also states the port-usage experiences, relevant findings, > evaluations and workarounds. It's expected the document could > provide an informative base line to help operators choosing a proper > method. > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation > > There's also a htmlized version available at: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation-02 > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation= - > 02 > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > _______________________________________________ > I-D-Announce mailing list > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html > or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > _______________________________________________ > sunset4 mailing list > sunset4@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable propri= etary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyrig= ht belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the u= se of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the= intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissem= ination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents= of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawf= ul. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender imm= ediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail an= d any printout. From phdgang@gmail.com Wed Jul 24 04:08:56 2013 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 F24EC11E820F for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 04:08:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aaA66ByZmntp for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 04:08:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qc0-x22f.google.com (mail-qc0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::22f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA9AB11E8140 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 04:08:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qc0-f175.google.com with SMTP id k14so157622qcv.34 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 04:08:54 -0700 (PDT) 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=ewI9hMer862hVaxzuBlN47S7ETYaGbkfOVWmDdM4XcM=; b=UcNX6MOAbF3lEZSh7YmYlHhc5zsTnHbn6d0F66m8nJg6GVFccMVi4oiAS1uXLDI2oR O7uvTIxxBfuvIDgEIq9dVHj9DCeIQN1KWWrWFcCf3h7H1H9kBgQ0FufBSljM568VYXWI bbwthegpgX2gCX3PePzyDWAAQymRKPAl3GlV3sRJW4BKlXUB4iCw2/TE3H0eVMEj43sL qNZ6oSQ4J6dzG7V5bZ6YrNo5XSV5nTH+YxoxyS4JAXEezSCfM0Bybf9WEJ65aD0TPQBQ EmOlauegg43VSQu7R1icTEwhZI5p4GNMv282dUR6nUKR2QCuNqiBQiwcAxwpCyHz7fqw N5yg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.75.133 with SMTP id y5mr16446869qaj.72.1374664133277; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 04:08:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.224.182.74 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 04:08:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD592304391117CD@PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com> References: <20130714161333.13130.21891.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD592304391117CD@PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com> Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 19:08:53 +0800 Message-ID: From: GangChen To: "George, Wes" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: "sunset4@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sunset4] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation-02.txt 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, 24 Jul 2013 11:08:56 -0000 Hi Wes, Thanks for your comments. 2013/7/23, George, Wes : > A couple of quick comments on Section 2: > > " With the merits of simplicity and efficiency, NAT64 will be likely > deployed." > --I think you're asserting that NAT64 is simple and efficient, but this begs > the question, "in comparison to what, and using what criteria?" I would > either remove this phrase (it's mainly just an introductory transition), or > provide supporting information to better advocate for NAT64. I'd prefer to remove this phrase. This may lead to another discussions, which may be worth to write another 20-pages draft. > " There was a testing on the comparison of port consumption on NAT64 > and NAT44." > --Citation, please? The testing was made in our IPv6 trials. I would change the sentence as "we have a testing on the comparison of port consumption on NAT64 and NAT44" Best Regards Gang > Thanks, > > Wes, as an individual. > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: sunset4-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sunset4-bounces@ietf.org] On >> Behalf Of GangChen >> Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 11:06 PM >> To: sunset4@ietf.org >> Subject: [sunset4] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port- >> allocation-02.txt >> >> wg, >> >> I submitted a new version of draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation >> The updates incorporated The comments on the previous meeting. >> Several testing results are described help to evaluate/verify/complete >> the statements. >> >> Your further reviews/comments are appreciated. >> >> BRs >> >> Gang >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org >> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 09:13:33 -0700 >> Subject: I-D Action: draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation-02.txt >> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org >> >> >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >> directories. >> >> >> Title : Analysis of NAT64 Port Allocation Method >> Author(s) : Gang Chen >> Filename : draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation-02.txt >> Pages : 11 >> Date : 2013-07-14 >> >> Abstract: >> The document enumerates methods of port assignment in CGN contexts, >> more focusing on a NAT64 environment. The analysis categorizes the >> different methods with several key features. The uses of existing >> protocols are further described corresponding to those features. >> This memo also states the port-usage experiences, relevant findings, >> evaluations and workarounds. It's expected the document could >> provide an informative base line to help operators choosing a proper >> method. >> >> >> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation >> >> There's also a htmlized version available at: >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation-02 >> >> A diff from the previous version is available at: >> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation- >> 02 >> >> >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> I-D-Announce mailing list >> I-D-Announce@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >> Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html >> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >> _______________________________________________ >> sunset4 mailing list >> sunset4@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 > > This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable > proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to > copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for > the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not > the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any > dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the > contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be > unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the > sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this > E-mail and any printout. > From marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca Wed Jul 31 10:01:32 2013 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 CF47021F942D for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 10:01:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.579 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.579 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.020, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4zKRg4ztKyT0 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 10:01:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jazz.viagenie.ca (jazz.viagenie.ca [IPv6:2620:0:230:8000::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B262B21F9A97 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 09:59:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from h195.viagenie.ca (h195.viagenie.ca [206.123.31.195]) by jazz.viagenie.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2EC4640415 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 12:59:20 -0400 (EDT) From: Marc Blanchet Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <5C78B390-FD5F-4C51-A58B-22D0780020AD@viagenie.ca> Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 18:59:19 +0200 To: "sunset4@ietf.org" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508) Subject: [sunset4] sunset4 and sunset4-dhc minutes 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, 31 Jul 2013 17:01:33 -0000 The minutes of the sunset4 and sunset4-dhc wg sessions today have been = posted.=20 http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/87/minutes/minutes-87-sunset4 Thanks a lot to Ole Troan for very good minutes. Please send comments about minutes to the chairs = (sunset4-chairs@tools.ietf.org) Marc&Wes