IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [90attendees] ietf-nat64 working nicely!

Leonard Giuliano <lenny@juniper.net> Wed, 23 July 2014 17:55 UTC

Return-Path: <lenny@juniper.net>
X-Original-To: 90attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 90attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58F891B2A22 for <90attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:55:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.602
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ej_-ikm17xz2 for <90attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:55:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2lp0209.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.163.209]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8FEFA1B29EC for <90attendees@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:54:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from BLUPR05CA0075.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.20.45) by BLUPR05MB723.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.207.153) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.990.7; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 17:54:56 +0000
Received: from BN1BFFO11FD015.protection.gbl (2a01:111:f400:7c10::1:177) by BLUPR05CA0075.outlook.office365.com (2a01:111:e400:855::45) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.990.7 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 17:54:56 +0000
Received: from P-EMF02-SAC.jnpr.net (66.129.239.16) by BN1BFFO11FD015.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.58.144.78) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.980.11 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 17:54:55 +0000
Received: from magenta.juniper.net (172.17.27.123) by P-EMF02-SAC.jnpr.net (172.24.192.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.146.0; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:54:54 -0700
Received: from eng-mail01.juniper.net (eng-mail01.juniper.net [172.17.28.114]) by magenta.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id s6NHsqn08563 for <90attendees@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:54:53 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lenny@juniper.net)
Received: by eng-mail01.juniper.net (Postfix, from userid 1709) id 0E0B51144E; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:54:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eng-mail01.juniper.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 021A911446 for <90attendees@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:54:43 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:54:43 -0700
From: Leonard Giuliano <lenny@juniper.net>
To: 90attendees@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <20140723104556.Y99232@eng-mail01.juniper.net>
Message-ID: <20140723104706.D99232@eng-mail01.juniper.net>
References: <20140723104556.Y99232@eng-mail01.juniper.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:66.129.239.16; CTRY:US; IPV:NLI; IPV:NLI; EFV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; SFS:(6009001)(199002)(189002)(83322001)(50986999)(85852003)(2351001)(107046002)(74502001)(46386002)(50466002)(45336002)(97736001)(54356999)(558084003)(76482001)(92566001)(81542001)(68736004)(107886001)(80022001)(76506005)(110136001)(106466001)(57986006)(81342001)(47776003)(20776003)(46406003)(81156004)(105596002)(79102001)(84676001)(102836001)(74662001)(69596002)(44976005)(83072002)(64706001)(85306003)(33656002)(95666004)(6806004)(77982001)(76176999)(92726001)(86362001)(99396002)(226693001)(87936001)(31966008)(4396001)(21056001)(23726002)(46102001)(42262001)(90966001); DIR:OUT; SFP:; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR05MB723; H:P-EMF02-SAC.jnpr.net; FPR:; MLV:sfv; PTR:InfoDomainNonexistent; MX:1; LANG:en;
X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:
X-Forefront-PRVS: 028166BF91
Received-SPF: SoftFail (: domain of transitioning juniper.net discourages use of 66.129.239.16 as permitted sender)
Authentication-Results: spf=softfail (sender IP is 66.129.239.16) smtp.mailfrom=lenny@juniper.net;
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/90attendees/8wgkeuzbPKfkqJaJ_pQ_GFVFFVE
Subject: Re: [90attendees] ietf-nat64 working nicely!
X-BeenThere: 90attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <90attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/90attendees>, <mailto:90attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/90attendees/>
List-Post: <mailto:90attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:90attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/90attendees>, <mailto:90attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 17:55:11 -0000

| Let me be more clear as well: by continuing to provide IPv4 on the
| default IETF meeting network, we are being part of the problem.

And by using unicast, we are being part of another problem.  I assume all 
the audio/video streams are being multicast, right?

Don't forget the other religions...
Lenny

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status