Re: IETF network incremental plan

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Thu, 17 November 2016 00:33 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAAD01295D7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 16:33:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 M49mc6jKFMgN for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 16:33:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm0-x234.google.com (mail-wm0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C23E6126579 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 16:33:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wm0-x234.google.com with SMTP id a197so276311935wmd.0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 16:33:18 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=IYqGx33DrCz5XbVkzvMYKGTk9b2I6w8JMX0gtzeoSlQ=; b=n+qr+XVYhadXinfdeULz+j8USLSAbQr1J1NMCLSdg1FV6vD/lzx9WcFHprWNalGduj vThybwKk89iklNyJxnFqN1jXqFEoBbtwqmva14VJUkY4D8xY5tM7UGd99qp/ZQyBffka E07k52lbVSqtoISLfJjn9XYTrMG4L4pK3DZTcx/mxexqEQ6ie5AHnlApONKS09ulHeZv ReRp9qu9tyO+SWK7iyrISlU2ctrl+Zj6PqzRT4YJVb2XLROQavonl0/fgeVjgBHKpXnq imsAFRASdKA1s4RewTusJSQzHE7hMSawCE4V2lh5tTc0LwLWMqxvX4AIqUNRwpmO/XZZ gHWA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=IYqGx33DrCz5XbVkzvMYKGTk9b2I6w8JMX0gtzeoSlQ=; b=REzZIvD4xwA0fHj7Ubr3WBAICChukl1HaxRrGdbtvQOvNr8FVw95XJs1lSm9KS/bpQ JqXyVzD812avccUtlNzK+IweIwteFVl2VkcGr6Hg8IQIsSty9j5PQZ5BNYqOqxZd3gN3 doCAy9keigEXGRtAz0Vs3hjStQjROc0dUHLox6cyLqwdpj0wO6WrqKzpw+e4SU+UMiZK 79vbpwywOQ2I4KEicQkpmJw9NFfH4RZdpENXpRBvIHovM1afBJjubwBK0cXXzsDeoTNE Qrd8WtLVcOhRhBt48doftuPNUKYGuuq4ZJ90E5Time/cMYBoBzjiWyGEC78yG9fO7h8n 7hDA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvfASmluDv6rye4LOn0U9A9wZGEsEYjDFuR2m7h/USWSJ7pWX/8hJQWwq5/BqpztTqRJqOZf/gzmozLyYw==
X-Received: by 10.46.9.21 with SMTP id 21mr134378ljj.0.1479342797291; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 16:33:17 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.25.43.210 with HTTP; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 16:32:36 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <m2zikzq7tg.wl-randy@psg.com>
References: <0C5BCD32-2D2A-42B9-8DEA-A1E1A527A8BB@consulintel.es> <m2zikzq7tg.wl-randy@psg.com>
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 09:32:36 +0900
Message-ID: <CAPt1N1k2m5YLY3wW9Vs61536P+YR3kXQhmveSyfqUhW_bazQ8A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: IETF network incremental plan
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/dmkVzGgKONIu2YXbyH3Ehbww1h4>
Cc: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>, Jordi Palet Martinez <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 00:33:21 -0000

At present android apps running on chromebooks do not work over nat64.
  I believe one of our colleagues at Google has filed a bug report on
this, so hopefully it will no longer be an issue in Chicago.

OpenVPN works with nat64, but requires special configuration file
hacking in some cases.

I have no other issues with it.   If it weren't for the fact that my
xmpp app is an Android app, I would be using ietf-nat64 exclusively.

On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 9:16 AM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
> last evening i was carrying a question from the noc team but my position
> in the mic queue was preempted by more important people.
>
> but essentially, before we make tactical decisions we would like to know
> what the purpose and goal of the meeting network is.
>
>   o folk just want to get work done, and the net should bloody well work
>
>   o i want to forward test internet futures: ipv6, auth methods, crypto,
>     ...
>
>   o i have my own stuff i want to test (which may need inbound sessions)
>
>   o network?  what network?
>
> in the nat64 case, are we trying to validate the well-known lists of
> what does not work over nat64, spotify, many vpns, ...?  if it is
> because we think we can modify nat64 to ameliorate the problems, this
> would be brilliant.
>
> if we know what the goals are, we should be able to meet them.  so far,
> the assumption is that
>
>   o the primary goal of the meeting netowrk is for attendees to get work
>     done
>
>   o nats breaking applications and inbound connections would be
>     considered as breakage
>
>   o we do want to support occasional experiments, both non-disruptive
>     and visible (remember the v6-only plenary?)
>
>   o but basically, i just want my mtv
>
> randy, not speaking for anyone else
>