IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: DNS64, DANE and DPRIV

Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> Sun, 07 December 2014 01:09 UTC

Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46BD21A6F30 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Dec 2014 17:09:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.277
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.277 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 whgdjbdt6nWh for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Dec 2014 17:09:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-la0-x232.google.com (mail-la0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::232]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B84601A6F2C for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 6 Dec 2014 17:09:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-la0-f50.google.com with SMTP id pn19so2449221lab.9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 06 Dec 2014 17:09:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=8b+D9Be6FOeHvIj/4g8k0cBVA59OmnAh1KWsi4Hivxw=; b=0xzDN0ctBOYYnPX709/pUm0QVgImx52ki9SHp5ql7l22uNwQZgPZYFtsbHVAInWwaJ tLgadMp+qNzjW7evtCEAS0yP6I2wkRQHCFzCQI4uemrV2mirU2vD0v/cVPSpuS0P2hQE tRrxKCRTs7Xnkf+3AXsGkanBIX4HtoIHfd2gRG0pVMVZcbLHFut59iCZIgdszf3eXudX dlY1JyTEFLdVO7U/e6Xovn7U25uDCj2AAmLQ3bNVVRuGHMzJkJpSOlgAl73jYXJxdU3c ajkEsVyYZ11Km4vRFtN0qk8xGnw8QW9FGhy8xZxr1/0+uQ+bVgapO33MMQvoFLM+gnd/ T6sw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.141.233 with SMTP id rr9mr9790432lbb.1.1417914579250; Sat, 06 Dec 2014 17:09:39 -0800 (PST)
Sender: hallam@gmail.com
Received: by 10.112.19.42 with HTTP; Sat, 6 Dec 2014 17:09:39 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <m2tx18e3b5.wl%randy@psg.com>
References: <CAMm+Lwj+KjTVka1M7O+tsp76C_OCGR0bWKH_k5UrZXSYZrF+GA@mail.gmail.com> <20141206213552.2777C2508A06@rock.dv.isc.org> <m24mt8fmkk.wl%randy@psg.com> <20141206235836.92E062509740@rock.dv.isc.org> <m2tx18e3b5.wl%randy@psg.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2014 20:09:39 -0500
X-Google-Sender-Auth: sM7Gwf58fH_Qf69-yATrXm9ynfY
Message-ID: <CAMm+LwgE4Cihn_+9mX6h9GhwGTx3XWAuegyxDT=09DxFVWsqbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: DNS64, DANE and DPRIV
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c38be8d17591050995f661"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/BtC4OwnmaD1X9vBBZb85OoSPsIg
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2014 01:09:42 -0000

On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:

> >>> DNS64 is not the only solution for a ISP to go IPv6 only.
> >> 64 was motivated by the need for a 6-only *enterprise*
> >
> > And DNS64 requires NAT in the core and a fork lift upgrade of the
> > CPE to support IPv6.
>
> no.  let's try reading what i said again.  i requires nat at the edge of
> the V6-ONLY ENTERPRISE.  considering the enterprise is v6-only and
> trying to talk to a v4 world, address translation is inevitable.
>

Actually it requires NAT, the NAT does not need to be at the egress point
from the network. It could be provided by a NAT tied to the destination
network.


Mark we avoid talking in acronyms? What is this CPE requiring a fork lift
truck? And what does Nintendo have to do with this?

If you spell out the acronym Network Address Translation, it becomes
obvious that Randy is right - it has to happen somewhere.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email