Re: [shim6] draft-garcia-shim6-applicability-01

[Geoff Huston <[e-mail]>]

Frankly I think it better not to use such loaded terms in an RFC

if you dropped "Despite...connectivity," from the document would it really
change anything?

regards,

   Geoff

On 15/10/2011, at 6:31 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

> Yes, thanks. It's better to point to the less harmful solution than
> to imply NAPTv6.
> 
> Regards
>   Brian
> 
> On 2011-10-15 05:21, Alberto García wrote:
>> Hi Brian,
>> 
>> [...]
>> |  > - I've added a new subsection named 'Shim6 and IPv6 NAT' after the
>> |  > firewall section. In short, IPv6 NATs may allow communicating with the
>> |  > ULID pair (with the initial locators), but communication will break
>> |  > with some cases in which locators are changed.
>> |  
>> |  
>> |  Please please change this to refer to *prefix* translation and RFC 6296.
>> |  Although that RFC is only Experimental, the idea is to show that the prefix
>> |  translation (not NAPT) is all we need for IPv6.
>> 
>> Sure. Do you think it would be enough to change the first sentence of the 'Shim6 and IPv6 NAT' section to include a reference to RFC 6296, as follows?:
>> 
>>  "Despite the animosity of the technical community against IPv6 NATs
>>   because of disrupting end-to-end connectivity, address translation
>>   techniques such as Network Prefix Translation [RFC6296] may be used
>>   until workable solutions to avoid renumbering or facilitate
>>   multihoming are developed [RFC5902].  We now consider the impact of
>>   IPv6 NATs in Shim6 operation."
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Alberto
>> 
>> 
>> |  
>> |  Regards
>> |     Brian
>> |  
>> |  > Since there are many changes, I have generated a new version of the
>> |  draft:
>> |  > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-garcia-shim6-applicability/
>> |  >
>> |  > What do you think?
>> |  >
>> |  > Thanks,
>> |  > Alberto
>> |  >
>> |  > |
>> |  > |  In any case I support this draft going forward to the AD quite soon.
>> |  > |
>> |  > |  Regards
>> |  > |     Brian Carpenter
>> |  > |
>> |  > |
>> |  > |
>> |  > |