Re: [Softwires] sharing restricted addresses by hosts in 4rd (draft-despres-intarea-4rd-01)

Alain Durand <adurand@juniper.net> Tue, 19 April 2011 16:07 UTC

Return-Path: <adurand@juniper.net>
X-Original-To: softwires@ietfc.amsl.com
Delivered-To: softwires@ietfc.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC98FE07A0 for <softwires@ietfc.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 09:07:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.455
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.455 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.144, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, 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 77c0wgVgXKrJ for <softwires@ietfc.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 09:07:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og106.obsmtp.com (exprod7og106.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.165]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C752E0799 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 09:07:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from P-EMHUB03-HQ.jnpr.net ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob106.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKTa2zVE3Pzn4DXA2LNszRF4Tt9Za6GA8V@postini.com; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 09:07:51 PDT
Received: from EMBX01-HQ.jnpr.net ([fe80::c821:7c81:f21f:8bc7]) by P-EMHUB03-HQ.jnpr.net ([::1]) with mapi; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 09:04:00 -0700
From: Alain Durand <adurand@juniper.net>
To: Mark Townsley <mark@townsley.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 09:06:04 -0700
Thread-Topic: [Softwires] sharing restricted addresses by hosts in 4rd (draft-despres-intarea-4rd-01)
Thread-Index: Acv+q6+7trPbV/GGSzCqWjFL/bXilw==
Message-ID: <AFD88BB1-98F0-4BAB-AC3E-A67DF714ADD0@juniper.net>
References: <DD1A73D9E9C89144A927C5080F70285A015E3F1E01DE@NA-EXMSG-S702.segroup.winse.corp.microsoft.com> <5C4F8A4C-A7AE-4E6E-960B-650DED19982F@townsley.net>
In-Reply-To: <5C4F8A4C-A7AE-4E6E-960B-650DED19982F@townsley.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "softwires@ietf.org" <softwires@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Softwires] sharing restricted addresses by hosts in 4rd (draft-despres-intarea-4rd-01)
X-BeenThere: softwires@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: softwires wg discussion list <softwires.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/softwires>
List-Post: <mailto:softwires@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 16:07:52 -0000

On Apr 12, 2011, at 4:03 PM, Mark Townsley wrote:

> 
> Hello Dmitry,
> 
> My view is that 4rd is most easily understood if and only if it connects to a CE function that is performing NAPT. The CE function may be in what is traditionally considered a host, or in what is clearly a router.
> 
> More specifically, a device that is forwarding packets from one interface (virtual or otherwise) to another through a NAPT that has one interface with IPv6 configured (via DHCPv6 or otherwise) as performing 4rd (which enables dual-stack via a port-restricted IPv4 address for the NAPT using IPv6 as the transport) then you a have a 4rd CE. That could be a "host" in that it is a Windows PC with internet connection sharing for IPv4 turned on and hence forwards packets between interfaces with a NAPT due to the IPv4-enabled interface created when 4rd is configured. 
> 
> I would avoid anything that requires the host forwarding table to be altered to accommodate 4rd. Instead, the NAPT function that is already present in a small router or host configured to look like a router is modified to use a set of ports that it is allowed to use when 4rd is enabled. 


Mark:

How would an app running on a 4rd CPE communicate in IPv4 to another app running on another 4rd CPE?

   - Alain.