IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bctb-6man-rfc6296-bis

Ole Trøan <otroan@employees.org> Wed, 27 March 2024 07:56 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F291C151069 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 00:56:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.104
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.104 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=employees.org
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Dq8GcHqQPvZy for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 00:56:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from proxmox01.kjsl.com (proxmox01.kjsl.com [204.87.183.6]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB36CC151063 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 00:56:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from proxmox01.kjsl.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox01.kjsl.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 42F49E5BF2; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 07:56:24 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=employees.org; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type :date:from:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=prox2023; bh=qwAsk0Z85BgDXtXW gWotsvTdCo6JNaNiiZ389TLpfJE=; b=LnYh1KmkMX2KDYWRgKejLlyGfopTUGyM pYe5cTaTJAZ+bGiwHBUKQ2zPpUGh7R3eJiOE/v2ReMLgGGBMQbYS5dlkP0x0OCuu vGvwcyo0H+5TSzrZutltTedop8c4sCR3MFhZJwr9UdcWQ9q7ao8ZogXjDvUfkTsc IAh84Mmvp/w9J8KGChq3uUv8n+UaBMys7NDB5vD3b/CMLIgTSFvY+KeZShjPcYCi LWTkYE6y1+8Crr0xrLf5HRqHERkr0a/fZ/hvyBQ8TBXYrRndRVS8aERF/ebP2Lhr ryKm72pREAH1rIdqfhVWLigklACgTkwdxYfLLXYV1Y7mcCLZpoR+Tw==
Received: from clarinet.employees.org (clarinet.employees.org [IPv6:2607:7c80:54:3::74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by proxmox01.kjsl.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 2496CE57C1; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 07:56:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2a02:20c8:5921:200:5c68:ce3d:28df:a140]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by clarinet.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DE9014E11BC7; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 07:56:23 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Ole Trøan <otroan@employees.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 08:56:11 +0100
Message-Id: <D407799F-72B8-4CB7-A66D-12F9E6717405@employees.org>
References: <CAKD1Yr2sLOg-w=Z8vRDOnor+HfUN-gVGXhVUAgT2Ux4NLtLvBg@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr2sLOg-w=Z8vRDOnor+HfUN-gVGXhVUAgT2Ux4NLtLvBg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (21E236)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/FvaBDGXzO3AjuG9jhuDaoHudFH0>
Subject: Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bctb-6man-rfc6296-bis
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 07:56:28 -0000


> On 27 Mar 2024, at 02:35, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> I know that sounds like ignoring the problem, and ignoring the problem was what got us into trouble with NAT44. But I think that's fundamentally different. NAT44 had irresistible pressures behind it in the form of IPv4 address exhaustion. IPv6 is in a completely different situation: there is plenty of space and almost half the Internet has deployed end-to-end IPv6 already.

Half the Internet is capable of using IPv6 in exactly the same way as with shared IPv4 addressing. 

Client to cloud. 
The proportion of users using IPv6 end-to-end would be more representative. 

Unfortunately it’s not just the address space. Read the document. 

O.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email