IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [BEHAVE] RFC6147 and RFC7208 interoperability issues

Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> Mon, 07 February 2022 00:41 UTC

Return-Path: <moore@network-heretics.com>
X-Original-To: behave@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: behave@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 527753A107E for <behave@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Feb 2022 16:41:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.612
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.612 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.714, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com
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 NNnayk5ZHMz6 for <behave@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Feb 2022 16:41:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3CCD43A107C for <behave@ietf.org>; Sun, 6 Feb 2022 16:41:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BEBE5C0053 for <behave@ietf.org>; Sun, 6 Feb 2022 19:41:16 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 06 Feb 2022 19:41:16 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id :mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to :x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm2; bh=Isgnu8mfDrgc6Bhzoc7tJ3tURP8a9a9k7fNbl0GYoaQ=; b=Y9VkZyba 3Mff+ado2YVm1zxHvyxLf0x75I2aaNNuR9Ou77vPN1gpkTx8vFv0VteGnMNnQLfx 3iul/X+/ywabS1fqRsP/j37SfjGVn/tsxR4bZ7dK6QOTCwyqBjJFIrEA/u0g0WhH h8sm4jnezcLLWqHaf0Kjsy+tora/ekEJFYvQ+LvUTHTE43rz0jYYs2vS+j0UzSeD 0kswANkjQyTYqK2Zi1mPBTNxlSvWTBPghUpaOm3WVGCTwsNKOL3jD/0H9T+b6a3q g2wtjtlHv+lOXznxP5uFBL63po53c6NXhUSzHij3FwWctYv7Hx0aiMBrKokkcX6Z VuGlEKwsZZP5AA==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:q2oAYoC0fMcam9df22-moya0Ld8FyC16uryYLB2NK6YGnXqy63RyfA> <xme:q2oAYqj2OahDUh83_IpIKL2w5zhMVRqoKmo5MMwHA0_DdbpQmS3i0LnKZQQOwi5qG 29Pl6N4_S0-Mw>
X-ME-Received: <xmr:q2oAYrlNib5KZYrC7l0PyB7JumxbllvWzX1QhfJdOL8d4tr8OL4xpyrEsOqCaJAKtmaKQpN11CgafYGxDBDmwi1a0lCIrJjSQYz->
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvvddrheeggddvvdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepkfffgggfuffvfhfhjggtgfesthekre dttdefjeenucfhrhhomhepmfgvihhthhcuofhoohhrvgcuoehmohhorhgvsehnvghtfiho rhhkqdhhvghrvghtihgtshdrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepfedtvdelieejve ekjefhueduheeviefhjeefvdfgudfhfffhudduudefgefgteevnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfu ihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhoohhrvgesnhgvthifohhrkh dqhhgvrhgvthhitghsrdgtohhm
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:rGoAYuy5udUZ64pj3xUCXkKgUHOk79TsVhWF-xQZZUOnAgUv-913QQ> <xmx:rGoAYtT18SYNPbUv_G6b-KvsiwPmUyJviLH1-ciAAASb0amI24bieg> <xmx:rGoAYpa_OPC77bJllE7pXfq1iPqtvjx1OgqXCmHU67EMW3gf5-3USA> <xmx:rGoAYkcv_02WOY1wyNWqie_rTkIBaClKR-I1sNN5mfXbP4cc9AInqA>
Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA for <behave@ietf.org>; Sun, 6 Feb 2022 19:41:15 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <7a008cc2-e8a3-f91d-c782-96866c36a9db@network-heretics.com>
Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2022 19:41:14 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: behave@ietf.org
References: <45e423cc-4095-cca2-bf8c-aa15e977b19c@posteo.de> <ff858dee-a21a-a50d-72a5-da7915ac2de4@network-heretics.com> <71b5cdb0-78af-0f77-debc-84e178fe5e3a@posteo.de>
From: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
In-Reply-To: <71b5cdb0-78af-0f77-debc-84e178fe5e3a@posteo.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/behave/HC7Y_prFJKYvKqvOTR_fMtSHuKw>
Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] RFC6147 and RFC7208 interoperability issues
X-BeenThere: behave@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: mailing list of BEHAVE IETF WG <behave.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/behave/>
List-Post: <mailto:behave@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2022 00:41:24 -0000

On 2/6/22 19:38, Klaus Frank wrote:

> I can understand you. I also don't like NAT. And I would also have 
> favored different migration paths from IPv4 to IPv6. But NAT64+DNS64 
> is the one we got. I'm sure there have been discussions earlier. I 
> didn't want to resume or repeat those discussions. I'm certain there 
> are valid reasons for why we have the current migration paths and that 
> the pros and cons of different strategies have been covered adequately.
>
> Nonetheless DNS64 is incomplete without also addressing the SPF record.
>
Disagree.  DNS64 is inherently incomplete and cannot be fixed.  I will 
strongly object to any effort to further pollute DNS in the name of 
making NAT appear to work.

Keith

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email