IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: there _is_ IPv6 NAT - just look for it

Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> Mon, 17 March 2014 02:00 UTC

Return-Path: <lorenzo@google.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 263DA1A0356 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 19:00:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.925
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.925 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 OcAAEm4dqRaP for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 19:00:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ig0-x234.google.com (mail-ig0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 898BF1A0228 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 19:00:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ig0-f180.google.com with SMTP id hl1so4215133igb.1 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 18:59:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=HcWBSIydXx4H5aodJs7hZ8+dH5NYih/11fnOu9UJDhg=; b=ipdtywioHXGz6cE5tZpbnLohIbD5Ov2uexglCxh0lI+o/J4waVH3tG+zykVc9BT1AC 4hXw/bXjqWcptJKTwtt2ePto92sSqWhmu1Vcd+FBtOAGgjRZtlcG+YALmSb7EZABhbnF EXfrFeQ66ndJ1xnANRdM+iUaFJ7JW25RvE9RoP2fdz8NDH/FpAngu9HGOuytAmsMhksA zzXYgNDaCE0aqZ3g7kQGFNBhbF/Vozg7KDWPPYS/WoUmkvChXvoNl9ndKzX9JrUdD0IG DA7Tlkk+BQjHaqgta65oPgoJN/lzU2mzzEt2vNca4HOjhws+9vj7P4rm7nOVuaYQLqtb vt7Q==
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:content-type; bh=HcWBSIydXx4H5aodJs7hZ8+dH5NYih/11fnOu9UJDhg=; b=FPhYW8XaHk58/+aOHriIviB3jTIIIT8TOjyUlE20amMW7YfAwGsMjrecefOhprYR2e QrigbanRAg4MfSRuIO31e6ciD1EBBCE1Hfx7GC3FSpI2JycbHgEPnNbY7J3gfUsatL5a 7XLhGC0baAvmxALH6tMFG+c0iJf2lBpoO4eyKrPmd7boRtScp+AhgHBoLuk6ki9GuXtE s1/NmDrRXD63a7BVQAxxfwCK/0y55P4YBZZFlT5x7h3KSo6bMA1Kk1YT6YVhBE+QV4KT jOC3k0fkS7XhkhByftzUdoFjjKFCJfxszMEnwTDzcCnu7LyweYHpdMYQkw1FXiaEkeDR Fw7g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnd8Qub+EEE0hK8GiQTjYpuaIyu84FrwU4BBXqIpmWpGcxwr59VLOOhyRR/PMgKEyvtWI644+iCcCSJLCnUmg+eDsGfVWVZHmu0r3vB+LN1jcAo7MPiACE/fm+VilLRZemBrJwnrugcCFsWJT68koI+68JrLObU4gvAfhMSFMBZBVJZ1TthPNqS0cpmpFQpPTUeRN14
X-Received: by 10.43.90.202 with SMTP id bj10mr3841443icc.48.1395021598647; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 18:59:58 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.64.18.136 with HTTP; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 18:59:38 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <021E64FECA7E5A4699562F4E66716481189E49E8@XCH-PHX-503.sw.nos.boeing.com>
References: <E2C06D73-99FF-42B5-A3BE-337C307BCB0E@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr0fjSWfPDkvc9Z53xBKxMGzYcVGzH3tLUGbjCKmgR_Duw@mail.gmail.com> <532374CD.3040100@gmail.com> <532401CB.8000003@gmail.com> <5324A1FF.3010109@gmail.com> <53255C09.7060900@gmail.com> <021E64FECA7E5A4699562F4E66716481189E49E8@XCH-PHX-503.sw.nos.boeing.com>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 10:59:38 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKD1Yr3sA4_4y18KBmBGOmY=PLOn1W4_F-3cgKyAfp4BQMUa=Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: there _is_ IPv6 NAT - just look for it
To: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="bcaec5186f0ad78f9c04f4c3c6ea"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/KhsdrJN0IjQCYQEnbwblO9jGltw
Cc: "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 02:00:08 -0000

On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 6:52 AM, Manfredi, Albert E <
albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com> wrote:

> The IETF needs to deal with reality, though. I see a 64-bit IID mandate,
> the existence of /64 prefix assignments to customers, and opposition to
> IPv6 NAT as being internally inconsistent. Something has to give. I'm
> starting to see that IPv6 NAT will become popular in short order.
>

In what scenario do you see this as being necessary?

   - For residential ISPs, there's DHCPv6 PD (and all ISPs I'm aware of are
   handing out larger than /64, either by default, or if the customer CPE
   advertises in a DHCPv6 PD hint that it would like larger than /64).
   - For pre-rel10 3GPP links with a fixed allocation size of /64,
   there's draft-ietf-v6ops-64share

Anything else?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email