IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@shinkuro.com> Tue, 01 December 2009 19:40 UTC

Return-Path: <ajs@shinkuro.com>
X-Original-To: behave@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: behave@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CEAF3A6A48 for <behave@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Dec 2009 11:40:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.268
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.268 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.331, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pQSPnEGVlfHM for <behave@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Dec 2009 11:40:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.yitter.info (mail.yitter.info [208.86.224.201]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3A873A6A47 for <behave@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Dec 2009 11:40:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from crankycanuck.ca (69-196-144-230.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.196.144.230]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 984892FE8CDD for <behave@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Dec 2009 19:40:19 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 14:40:18 -0500
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@shinkuro.com>
To: behave@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20091201194017.GU71984@shinkuro.com>
References: <bcff0fba0911302332ub498269qabbdca8341b018d5@mail.gmail.com> <002f01ca7265$b6ededb0$d40c6f0a@china.huawei.com> <097401ca72aa$0828aa50$c3f0200a@cisco.com> <4B1559E6.4060003@viagenie.ca> <E4561B14EE2A3E4E9D478EBFB5416E1B29B5A944@TK5EX14MBXW653.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <E4561B14EE2A3E4E9D478EBFB5416E1B29B5A944@TK5EX14MBXW653.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] proprietary implementation v.s standardisedprotocols//re: draft-xu-behave-nat-state-sync-00
X-BeenThere: behave@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: mailing list of BEHAVE IETF WG <behave.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:40:28 -0000

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.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@shinkuro.com
Shinkuro, Inc.

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email