Re: [BEHAVE] proprietary implementation v.s standardisedprotocols//re: draft-xu-behave-nat-state-sync-00

> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: behave-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:behave-bounces@ietf.org] 代表
> Cameron Byrne
> 发送时间: 2009年12月2日 6:05
> 收件人: Simon Perreault
> 抄送: behave@ietf.org
> 主题: Re: [BEHAVE] proprietary implementation v.s standardisedprotocols//re:
> draft-xu-behave-nat-state-sync-00
> 
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 12:07 PM, Simon Perreault
> <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca> wrote:
> > Andrew Sullivan wrote, on 2009-12-01 14:40:
> >> On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 07:26:29PM +0000, Dave Thaler wrote:
> >>> So yes NAT64 should try (to the extent that is practical)
> >>> to accommodate apps that don't pay attention to TTL, since that's
> >>> 99.99% of all applications.
> >>
> >> Either that, or we should get to work on changing the APIs.  Since I
> >> predict heat death of the universe first, I agree with Dave.
> >
> > No, let's change the APIs to make NAT64 work!
> >
> > Just kidding... we all agree on that. But what was the point again?
> >
> > The point was that you cannot fail over clients from one Pref64::/n to another
> > because applications will remember addresses. This is true, to some extent.
> If
> > it was 100% true then you wouldn't be able to change anything once you publish
> a
> > DNS record. In reality, hosts are rebooted, applications are restarted, and
> web
> > pages are reloaded. So you have some wiggle room.
> >
> > Failing over to another Pref64::/n is an unlikely event. It means that
> something
> > *really bad* happened. (See my other email about the two types of breakage.)
> Any
> > partial fix is better than just shutting of the Internet to your customers.
> If
> > it means they have to close Outlook and restart it, so be it.
> 
> 100% agree.  Members in a cluster failing can locally be resolved
> without bouncing the Pref64.  If entire cluster fails, this is very
> unlikely but catastrophic, i just want a fail safe that can work
> *mostly*, and if the networks really broke, asking a user to reboot

Ask a user or ask a huge amount of users?

By the way, if one uses one of those mechanisms defined in draft-wing-behave-learn-prefix, other than DNS64, to synthesize IPv6 addresses, does that mean the DNS server or the DHCP server should also dynamically detect the availability of each prefix64?

Xiaohu

> their phone and be fixed in 1 minute is better than waiting for a 4
> hour RMA or  guy with backhoe to fix fiber or electrician to arrve
> ,...
> 
> 
> >
> > Simon
> > --
> > DNS64 open-source   --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
> > STUN/TURN server    --> http://numb.viagenie.ca
> > vCard 4.0           --> http://www.vcarddav.org
> > _______________________________________________
> > Behave mailing list
> > Behave@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Behave mailing list
> Behave@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave