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

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

Geoff, I think you're right, even though I share the animosity.

Regards
   Brian Carpenter

On 2011-10-15 14:03, Geoff Huston wrote:
> 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
>>> |  > |
>>> |  > |
>>> |  > |
>>> |  > |
>