Re: [Int-area] Revving draft-intarea-shared-addressing-issues

"Dan Wing" <dwing@cisco.com> Mon, 14 June 2010 20:16 UTC

Return-Path: <dwing@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: int-area@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-area@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D7463A69AA for <int-area@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Jun 2010 13:16:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.643
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.643 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.956, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 0goJMAbyeKPo for <int-area@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Jun 2010 13:15:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2972C3A694E for <int-area@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Jun 2010 13:15:46 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AtUJAFYrFkxAZnwM/2dsb2JhbACHY4EUiSuMSnGmSJoWhRoEg00
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,415,1272844800"; d="scan'208";a="121504540"
Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com ([64.102.124.12]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 14 Jun 2010 20:15:46 +0000
Received: from dwingwxp01 (sjc-vpn2-998.cisco.com [10.21.115.230]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o5EKFj1n004783; Mon, 14 Jun 2010 20:15:45 GMT
From: Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>
To: 'Bernard Aboba' <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>, dthaler@microsoft.com, ford@isoc.org
References: <1339FDB5-B518-4210-9D7E-6711E4E10DB0@isoc.org>, <020401cb08ec$97759280$b94c150a@cisco.com><4C11EB81.9090407@gmail.com>, <01ee01cb0a4c$1d528290$7844150a@cisco.com>, <6A8F3173-1CC1-4A0A-A96D-EE5AF1D8B58D@isoc.org>, <04b601cb0be9$308d1930$7844150a@cisco.com>, <9B57C850BB53634CACEC56EF4853FF652C05FEC1@TK5EX14MBXW604.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com> <BLU137-W306A1BCDBB7C8182DAC35293DC0@phx.gbl>
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 13:15:44 -0700
Message-ID: <05a001cb0bfe$5fc2c5f0$7844150a@cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
Thread-Index: AcsL/O08YveqZHR+RpO22FpS5bGt4wAAOOSw
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350
In-Reply-To: <BLU137-W306A1BCDBB7C8182DAC35293DC0@phx.gbl>
Cc: int-area@ietf.org, brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com, draft-ford-shared-addressing-issues@tools.ietf.org, lorenzo@google.com
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Revving draft-intarea-shared-addressing-issues
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <int-area.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/int-area>
List-Post: <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 20:16:01 -0000

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bernard Aboba [mailto:bernard_aboba@hotmail.com] 
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 1:05 PM
> To: dthaler@microsoft.com; dwing@cisco.com; ford@isoc.org
> Cc: int-area@ietf.org; brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com; 
> draft-ford-shared-addressing-issues@tools.ietf.org; lorenzo@google.com
> Subject: RE: [Int-area] Revving draft-intarea-shared-addressing-issues
> 
> The NAT box can use its public IPv4 address to enable 6to4, 
> thereby providing IPv6 support for hosts "behind" it.  Why 
> would this result in a disconnected IPv6 island?

Diagram of what I understand the problem to be with 6to4
behind another NAT:

  IPv6 host--+
              \
               +---[home NAT]----[Carrier's NAT]---[Internet]
              /      ^       ^                  ^
  IPv6 host--+       ^       ^                  ^
                     ^       ^             IP address sharing
                     ^       ^             with multiple 
                     ^       ^             subscribers
                     ^       ^
                     ^     the in-home NAT's WAN address 
                     ^     is not publicly routable
                     ^
                     ^
               this in-home 
             NAT turns on 6to4

-d

> > From: dthaler@microsoft.com
> > To: dwing@cisco.com; ford@isoc.org
> > Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:04:31 +0000
> > CC: int-area@ietf.org; brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com; 
> draft-ford-shared-addressing-issues@tools.ietf.org; lorenzo@google.com
> > Subject: Re: [Int-area] Revving 
> draft-intarea-shared-addressing-issues
> > 
> > > Some routers enable 6to4 [RFC3056] on their WAN link. 
> 6to4 requires a
> > > publicly-routable IPv4 address. Enabling 6to4 behind a 
> NAT causes a
> > > disconnected IPv6 island."
> > 
> > The last sentence above is incorrect. The second sentence 
> is correct.
> > So one cannot "enable" 6to4 behind a NAT since one has no 
> > publically-routable IPv4 address. Hence one does not get an IPv6
> > island. One gets no IPv6 at all (from 6to4 anyway).
> > 
> > -Dave
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Int-area mailing list
> > Int-area@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
> 
>