IPv4 only apps [was: IPv6 only host NAT64 requirements?]

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 14 November 2017 01:33 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 589AD1270FC for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 17:33:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lE-e2Oyxgq5v for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 17:33:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg0-x22e.google.com (mail-pg0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::22e]) (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 1D9D11205F0 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 17:33:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id s2so14085823pge.10 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 17:33:09 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=d8Z7Uvq9d88JzwVvPVknHUB1Roir4zpJ6Chm+a1phTg=; b=TBEM+wXg95D4V3zyYvjSLQkbimlJ3GBch2dguESGpA4qaN2OwcdbIHWxu6dn2+faqY J8dI/k/2RiMLJjp8o3C/xESrwONp4DJV/095tDGUbviQLHgvHtERABVrrhMaj5OPfYRb BDQ3PDwyfDYcNo5kwSeBVMD9C94/iolzFOg+vS5+KFwJtUXeKWOyLXowq0VlRpI6AdiD ZtmBcaFmqv5FcbQR65/CIKvMIsSbBkNaSnyaDzhNjsYDRcY9ViRTpHU+XGk285UYCCeX yhCdzpQtZ2L4/lPGOFHgetZ8yqauqRK/p+mGQaZ0yuEtx3JNWt6Da61ammCo/wkivWvH nrKw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=d8Z7Uvq9d88JzwVvPVknHUB1Roir4zpJ6Chm+a1phTg=; b=ptbGFuF9+wmQ996BGGoHMvJL589/+4AOv7CVzLjTGkx+D7lNgjQZL3USRTE6QRASuv qfzjfp8BFpbNqXx5CdigVRPrBLI3qaL64OJJGO9cfMoVXuW4nem1dppJ23S3/Y7LSTxV cZH10+pn3qB+lCFt5ArALB8ePwx1NvVdxdza4aPpm31Ags/xxsKqRlDnXmJiXx74vpsg 9gZFcopyIzpZ3J1Rc6aKbYAmxXn23JPe12ohetd0eeNgE0/roK3OhsODWt2E5vaHzsdb zOoPAG5WjGe+5UByGptXuXRfyljTSXCnXvBIDehUPYGN7MCceqggoYKLnwg9EHSwETYs dwVg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX6LXu5aVrpZjxYxun5OuvvqQGEmaxAv66/Ma6KHvgwpQPW2xiyn kEpxT9EaeiQlkk6Xd0X5k9ZeaGBk
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMbPi0p131bIFWvoJ0tjBzxneeTXXLFJSxSjy5ziY3VuxOBWn2loZcpu7AJWFQDrLi2vsOv08g==
X-Received: by with SMTP id t18mr10484654plo.83.1510623188362; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 17:33:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:67c:370:1998:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781? ([2001:67c:370:1998:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r80sm36395808pfa.169.2017. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 13 Nov 2017 17:33:07 -0800 (PST)
Subject: IPv4 only apps [was: IPv6 only host NAT64 requirements?]
To: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
Cc: Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-4@u-1.phicoh.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
References: <m1eEGbJ-0000EhC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <D43E103C-27B8-48CF-B801-ACCF9B42533E@employees.org> <m1eEHPS-0000FyC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <909eb642-b2a0-2fb5-8f41-297e013ae307@gmail.com> <E6BCB92F-615A-4692-8AF2-D993D5B9AF7F@employees.org>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <f7baaadf-33c3-7fc2-d90e-872a0f69a5fa@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2017 14:33:06 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <E6BCB92F-615A-4692-8AF2-D993D5B9AF7F@employees.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/0Jbby3D9Arm-fI7zWDgXZ_nmaig>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2017 01:33:10 -0000

On 14/11/2017 13:37, Ole Troan wrote:
> Brian,
>> ...
>>> But for host software there is a lot more incentive to support dual stack then
>>> to do the extra step for NAT64.
>>> The big problem I see for NAT64 is that for old IPv4-only applications you
>>> have to make two fundamental changes to the application. The first to
>>> make sure that the application handles IPv6 in every possible way. And a
>>> second pass that makes sure that every place where an IPv4 address literal
>>> is handled, works with NAT64.
>>> For an application writer it is better to try to avoid doing the second pass.
>> I think there is a missing document, and it may well belong in v6ops not
>> 6man: "IPv4 Applications on an IPv6-only Host".
> IPv4 applications do not run on an IPv6 only host, so that's a short document.

No, I don't think so. We haven't done a good job of advising implementers
in this area, and those apps will not go away spontaneously. Tweaking them
for the new world may be much easier than getting them rewritten, in terms
of the incentives in play.
>> Your text above is probably a good summary of what the document needs
>> to cover. (I also suspect that if this document existed, we wouldn't need
>> Jordi's draft attempting to define "IPv6-only".)
> Please take that to a different thread.

Done ;-)

> This thread is about a IPv6 only, single stack host connecting to an IPv6 only network.
> With a backdoor to the IPv4 Internet for legacy destinations.

And that neglects the legacy that most such hosts have inside them.
I have a bunch in the host I'm typing on right now, which is connected
via NAT64 for the week.