Re: IPv6 only host NAT64 requirements?

Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com> Mon, 13 November 2017 15:46 UTC

Return-Path: <cb.list6@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 3CF591200FC for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 07:46:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.448
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.448 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rlayiJmXFbOW for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 07:46:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yw0-x232.google.com (mail-yw0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::232]) (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 264261200F1 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 07:46:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yw0-x232.google.com with SMTP id r186so5270146ywe.13 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 07:46:24 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/VX7BMnAv0k9pHjOv1/mqA/j7u1TWbW2hn2iQQUif88=; b=b4edcIgJZ1lGqZR6QwWV0s3mqTwRhAJswMHN06Zxx05OLINI0wXSmZmYvCqB+ViYiS WSm0kpVdUz0iNbZANEIjoXcpH2MmcNAvhBzmNl74sAFlMun2v3exf0Vi2PxpuFn4xB72 LddAv1fl8GMWNLKa09AfGSoIPCOQ6xE6S0t0de2rYzA5OTENuP1UgTIOZNAgCS5dA972 gvpBeWftDa3+4xsBLVQTTLYL2bN3AhvxuMcuN5W3taD2UbVO/IpGADvXlqnpplOIXYE5 5z9070rwX8jiyFuPv5x9XWpRN06G9jVrJtuFzUj1Fbqn/BCAen2rcHq7VT5DJ58f/C2C tolg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/VX7BMnAv0k9pHjOv1/mqA/j7u1TWbW2hn2iQQUif88=; b=REDbLsxzHKoNx6VzQo/UkhWA/Xr1mDEkeGHam/dtRyOwtHtUKkgfaEk60BXJM9Enrc GXkOBpCmaxihG3ff2b7TE3mAInvLlzVhwjhXNvy7dJ5PWfQN2WSKjmL5AuHyiUtmxEay 6mhoMDAYqDXDRsklYcwo+tMFijVp+PBOW/AeX1TM8cdJ1ZL3TZGyoaUIOfGU+6htV2p+ huWlQdBmavRb6db+AeIzYHrc6ZkQnHN84cfsU5RzHhn4x2Li8csK/hcN+Nt9Rek7d2bL fFjrlwKG68uKszsfSS7YTYg8ulTy0FuDD/bsqE6UkvLrwIMnZMXTpPYD3p/CyzRJ/PCQ 6aUA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX4pFD387v/ElDS87pWTXJnWKWRbeab/iHGHl7Hb/MYo3SRPMmqi NlHMwL/2HeIDKwrKbE2EFaCr2Zj8jRRZH2wx1apkcQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMbyD960tnQTjaVbyykublFIEPsJ32pJZAs+Vv5qIgvhnDg6746lShE7bOXadc5GaQnUyt8sGDy4m/hUBwjxw00=
X-Received: by 10.129.50.66 with SMTP id y63mr6286830ywy.490.1510587983320; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 07:46:23 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <m1eEGbJ-0000EhC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <D43E103C-27B8-48CF-B801-ACCF9B42533E@employees.org>
In-Reply-To: <D43E103C-27B8-48CF-B801-ACCF9B42533E@employees.org>
From: Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 15:46:12 +0000
Message-ID: <CAD6AjGR3FrVST4nyDDSOzFW8txK974FiFTtzt-4_GJwUvoA--Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: IPv6 only host NAT64 requirements?
To: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
Cc: 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-4@u-1.phicoh.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11413a2c25dbf0055ddf2c27"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/trPbhPMWA05K-GdeoEtitEuUR-Q>
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: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 15:46:26 -0000

On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 7:36 AM Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>; wrote:

> Philip,
>
> > In your letter dated Mon, 13 Nov 2017 10:50:40 +0800 you wrote:
> >> If this is the direction we want to go. Encourage IPv6 only host
> >> deployments (as opposed to dual stack hosts), are these requirements
> >> we'd like to add to the IPv6 node requirements document? Somewhere else
> >
> > Personally I don't like how NAT64 requires an IPv6 stack to deal with all
> > kinds of IPv4 issues. So for IPv6 node requirements, it should not go
> > beyond the level of MAY.
>
> Yes, that's certainly the bind we are in. Are we going to require all IPv6
> only nodes to be able to communicate with IPv4? And what does that entail?
> Do you have examples of "all kinds of IPv4 issues"?
>
> Apart from the requirement of NAT64 prefix discovery and IPv4
> synthesising, is there anything you don't need to do anyway?
> I can't quite see ICE/STUN going away, just because the end to end path is
> IPv6.
>

1. ICE and STUN are apps, and they should be fixed in the app layer not
network.

2.  ICE and STUN work great today with v4 and v6 peer candidates,
especially when combined with their close cousin TURN, in TRAM WG and
specifically https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tram-turnbis/






> While I'm also concerned about the consequences of carrying IPv4 debt in
> all IPv6 implementations, the alternative seems to be that we are stuck
> with Dual stack forever (for some definition of forever). This would at
> least allow us to move to single stack IPv6. Which appears to me to be a
> step forward. And we're very close to that already, and there are millions
> of devices already implementing it.
>
> Cheers,
> Ole
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>