Re: [nat66] New Version Notification - draft-mrw-nat66-13.txt
Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Sun, 24 April 2011 20:34 UTC
Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
X-Original-To: nat66@ietfc.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nat66@ietfc.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11F29E0692; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 13:34:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.543
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.543 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.056, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id itikPIDwkhxy; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 13:34:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73C3CE065A; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 13:34:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAE542CC38; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 23:34:41 +0300 (EEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KOMdIvvSRHzH; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 23:34:41 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (unknown [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EBF52CC2F; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 23:34:40 +0300 (EEST)
Message-ID: <4DB4895F.4070007@piuha.net>
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 23:34:39 +0300
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20101027)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
References: <20110421224502.21028.86343.idtracker@ietfc.amsl.com> <95A863F8-C3E6-4832-BB80-DD3398D6527A@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <95A863F8-C3E6-4832-BB80-DD3398D6527A@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>, "mrw@painless-security.com Wasserman" <mrw@painless-security.com>, NAT66 HappyFunBall <nat66@ietf.org>, Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [nat66] New Version Notification - draft-mrw-nat66-13.txt
X-BeenThere: nat66@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "List for discussion of IPv6-to-IPv6 NAT." <nat66.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/nat66>, <mailto:nat66-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nat66>
List-Post: <mailto:nat66@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nat66-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66>, <mailto:nat66-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 20:34:44 -0000
I have looked at the text proposal from Fred. Its good, but I would make a little bit stronger plus make an editorial change as the insertion of the new paragraph has affected the next one as well. OLD: Note that, for reasons discussed in [RFC2993] and Section 5, the IETF does not generally recommend the use of Network Address Translation technology. This has several ramifications: NEW: Note that, for reasons discussed in [RFC2993] and Section 5, the IETF does not generally recommend the use of Network Address Translation technology for IPv6. Where Network Address Translation is implemented, however, this specification provides a mechanism that has less architectural problems than merely implementing a traditional IPv4 NAT in an IPv6 environment. Some problems remain, however, and the reader should consult Section 5, [RFC4864], and [RFC5902], for the implications and approaches that help avoid all types of NATs. The stateless approach described in this document has several ramifications: Jari