IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Thu, 14 March 2024 19:06 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 [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9B06C14F68C for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 12:06:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.196
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.196 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.091, 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=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 Fp1lEnmUt7WJ for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 12:06:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf1-x42f.google.com (mail-pf1-x42f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42f]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C405C14F5E7 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 12:06:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf1-x42f.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-6e6b5432439so1378556b3a.1 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 12:06:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1710443188; x=1711047988; darn=ietf.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=i9YIGYTALLSPFjqybMZNxU2uqefyWxKdfJhMeV4yd8w=; b=cegcLEdHM+/VVBitvTEUhL6AWOdXHmmkApIQFeQZl2tnYAsNiMsl/hw+SCdQ7HE3L/ ImMb/4WGyEJcaKe3+yDeFk7rYvq/BylG6c2+T3yb65+iqHra7HK2GRKqGiacIbV+ryBh +iCEO2h3AG3ltrY5sA1YJJDrLZLm/zNYAubAkeXqubW5cwNh1oBcjuERwXtG6tJxIG9M 4h2Q8WR8I1nGmToxa/opx0bHPiR1E6kV/fr0/yKi6UpF9aHn+ORG9RtAFAfY4TG3iC99 YakdOZ5HgD8XKfvmyoPZgc6jomENocNpW1AVcyb3oMTiiOyE3lch+CBThsQgf8JeCH/a y8zg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1710443188; x=1711047988; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=i9YIGYTALLSPFjqybMZNxU2uqefyWxKdfJhMeV4yd8w=; b=SL8s6YB5lZ67Xv4/ExaEi/mfWxRpsMBN45cFrgOgncACAG2aRi48g7pz7PNpxVDBCD pUNTHKbYFzguZhARh3CzpFos6GoS20vFKBUL63GCL/GSVjSyYPECKquzz0Rw1yxIY/qS D23lcwFLoYAfLehwQVoqzzHXM/tewnzDccnYGFu1PM/jDC/OOR1NyuHXWAKKepb0VoAU b+fUiNBvRLjwCmXP4hopPYdG7uMS6L3VKOlI763hnO/LZzwNW5yrNmXGnrcyQkvjHtOB Manw35CAzUjpZtaeo1hca3Awc/T7ZWaEBq/XLk1HN5Rm1qYycIh5R3mweMlU8UUXoqO2 4GkQ==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUaoipokXdVQyIve/CK+q8NOdOFeCOAKxgC8i9OC0GS7AoifUF5SrL0Lm+KOs7wHQ7TSWHkgmCT2snjyYII
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwmWNG3ZczA9Mlbs1oK+oRXCXxIMmrm2yxBRqwIMV7YiigA321H okynYGSgZrfhUbM+qWWw3Jwc+8gQ6gSyU8KACPDEkXoAkg3Om+77
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGGoIb+DKsU6bONT3V1kmYwqVvWRLal3TJf6fUSnWpDGmt1N0fggundHXR5RzGvGywNmq0TEg==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a20:2591:b0:1a3:4868:e16b with SMTP id k17-20020a056a20259100b001a34868e16bmr1650220pzd.55.1710443188296; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 12:06:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPV6:2404:4400:541d:a600:44b7:2c2e:2bc6:8707? ([2404:4400:541d:a600:44b7:2c2e:2bc6:8707]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g70-20020a636b49000000b005ceeeea1816sm1050262pgc.77.2024.03.14.12.06.26 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 14 Mar 2024 12:06:27 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <df333346-f108-3782-0ff5-4bd85d7b49ac@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2024 08:06:24 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.10.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke@cisco.com>, IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>
References: <2D35BA3E-85C0-4382-892C-60B5C6097043@gmail.com> <60890238-0CDF-4B01-AC0E-ED977F9587FC@cisco.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <60890238-0CDF-4B01-AC0E-ED977F9587FC@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/tGr-dXLYmopsNKnOOhq3Y3kmbzo>
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: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 19:06:32 -0000

Eric,

> Standard track is the right one IMHO: it is implemented and deployed.

Yes, it is implemented and deployed, but that doesn't mean it's recommended.

Updating this to reflect experience and reality is undoubtedly a good idea,
but that doesn't imply that it's a recommended deployment model, which is
what the standards track would mean.

If it was to be on the standards track (or even if it's Informational),
I'd want the opening statement to be something like:

The mechanism described in this document SHOULD NOT be deployed except for
special cases as described in section TBD. Operators should first consider all
the disadvantages and side effects described in section TBD.

That should be summarised in the Abstract too.

Regards
    Brian Carpenter

On 14-Mar-24 22:39, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote:
> Without any special hat (except for the 128-bit one), I strongly support the adoption.
> 
> Like written by others, let's face it: 'address translation' does happen and let's do it while keeping end-to-end connectivity with a 1:1 mapping. I am also afraid that in the absence of src-dst routing some 'address translation' is required for multi-homing :-(
> 
> Standard track is the right one IMHO: it is implemented and deployed.
> 
> -éric
> 
> On 13/03/2024, 23:12, "ipv6 on behalf of Bob Hinden" <ipv6-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of bob.hinden@gmail.com <mailto:bob.hinden@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
> 
> This email starts an adoption call for the following document:
> 
> 
> Title: RFC 6296bis IPv6-to-IPv6 Network Prefix Translation
> Draft name: draft-bctb-6man-rfc6296-bis
> Link: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bctb-6man-rfc6296-bis/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bctb-6man-rfc6296-bis/>
> 
> 
> Substantive comments and statements of support for adopting this
> document should be sent to the mailing list. Editorial suggestions can
> be sent to the authors.
> 
> 
> The adoption call ends on Monday, 13 March 2024, 23:59 UTC.
> 
> 
> Bob and Jen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email