Re: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt

[Lee Howard <[e-mail]>]

I admit, it’s been a long time since I’ve read this draft.

One capability gap we still have: there’s no IPv6 version of FlowSpec.
There is an idr WG draft, but it hasn’t had a lot of discussion in recent
months: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6-08

Review of the gap-analysis draft: (summary at the bottom)
There are 16 specific problems identified. Some solutions are proposed in
Annex A; I’d rather see those incorporated into the text.

Can problems 1-5 (indicating that IPv4 is unavailable, disabling IPv4 in
the LAN) be addressed with recommendations in any, some, or all of:
draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6rtr-reqs-00 "Requirements for IPv6 Routers"
draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-04  “Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer
Edge Routers"

Or other drafts under discussion in v6ops now?
Or do we need new IPv6 signalling (RA?) that IPv4 is unavailable (as in
A.1.1 and A.1.2)?

Are problems 6 & 7 (Happy Eyeballs and getaddrinfo()) addressed with
draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc6555bis-03,  "Happy Eyeballs Version 2: Better
Connectivity Using Concurrency”?
      
    

Problems 8 and 9 are about surprises when IPv4 support is removed from the
kernel. I remember reading about this several years ago; should we have a
hackathon to repeat the experiment?

I’m not very clear on the IPv4-on-demand scenario described in Section 6
(and I don’t understand the solution in A.4). But we should probably write
a guidance document on how to handle problems 10-14, don’t you think?
Anyone want to volunteer for that?
Could Problem 10 be addressed in Happy Eyeballs v2, rfc6555bis?

Problem 15 (IPv4 address literals) is mitigated with most transition
technologies, isn’t it? Not NAT64 (requiring DNS64), but 464xlat, DS-Lite,
MAP.

I like the solutions proposed for Problem 16 (Router IDs): Just pick a
32-bit number and use it as the last 32 bits of the IPv6 address. If you
try, you could use it in multiple prefixes on the same router, including
Loopback, Link Local, and even GUAs. I’m not entirely sure this problem
qualifies as a gap, so much as an operational consideration.


Summary of proposed actions:
1. Ask authors of draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6rtr-reqs-00 and
draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-04  to consider whether they can respond to
problems 1-5.
2. Confirm that problems 6-7 are resolved in rfc6555bis, and ask whether
problem 10 can be.
3. Hackathon removing IPv6 support from the kernel. If it’s an IETF
Hackathon, need a Champion who is comfortable hacking the kernel. Would be
great to include people from Windows, Apple, Android.
4. Write a guidance document for IPv4-on-demand, covering problems 10-14.


I will do the first two things.
Do people agree with the other two things? Anyone want to volunteer?

Lee




On 8/3/17, 7:08 AM, "sunset4 on behalf of Liushucheng (Will Liu)"
<[e-mail] on behalf of [e-mail]> wrote:

>Hi all,
>
>We've updated the draft according to the comments we received online and
>offline. Please take a look and let us know your thought.
>
>Thanks!
>
>Will
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: sunset4 [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of
>[e-mail]
>Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2017 7:32 PM
>To: [e-mail]
>Cc: [e-mail]
>Subject: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt
>
>
>A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
>directories.
>This draft is a work item of the Sunsetting IPv4 WG of the IETF.
>
>        Title           : Gap Analysis for IPv4 Sunset
>        Authors         : Will(Shucheng) Liu
>                          Weiping Xu
>                          Cathy Zhou
>                          Tina Tsou
>                          Simon Perreault
>                          Peng Fan
>                          Rong Gu
>                          Chongfeng Xie
>                          Ying Cheng
>	Filename        : draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt
>	Pages           : 11
>	Date            : 2017-08-01
>
>Abstract:
>   Sunsetting IPv4 refers to the process of turning off IPv4
>   definitively.  It can be seen as the final phase of the transition to
>   IPv6.  This memo enumerates difficulties arising when sunsetting
>   IPv4, and identifies the gaps requiring additional work.
>
>
>The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis/
>
>There are also htmlized versions available at:
>https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09
>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09
>
>A diff from the previous version is available at:
>https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09
>
>
>Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
>submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at
>tools.ietf.org.
>
>Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>
>_______________________________________________
>sunset4 mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4
>
>_______________________________________________
>sunset4 mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4
>