Return-Path: X-Original-To: v4v6interim-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-v4v6interim-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E130B3A6A59; Thu, 2 Oct 2008 17:41:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: v4v6interim@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: v4v6interim@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A3AA3A6A59 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 2008 17:41:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.549 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.549 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lsayGo9DNTJH for ; Thu, 2 Oct 2008 17:41:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com (wf-out-1314.google.com [209.85.200.168]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E735B3A69D3 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 2008 17:41:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wf-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 27so1423121wfd.31 for ; Thu, 02 Oct 2008 17:41:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=u7wNSHtjayyA2GV4iDQKwNEHlbVLHq4X/K1INC6VfWQ=; b=ctr6ymUoWEwAPLemqFoDb+gs3yWarC4f+AUW9f7061H/4sO/IOZ73OpOjLbCLQgsYn 6s8GePnFs03+cl8kZU9EwIwdMLiu45LlpX+hXOQ7xKv5RmxVzTyH9IltsmgOC/iaePsD SpYv7uD1CDQ+dcNJVTa5OE6P5jSDUBEqmTpVk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=aZ8NLS7aJ13XrEbZ5iWFru2dQnApYGPHgv+uMay7DzRKZXCZORjfR/hyB9RQAvzpv3 42ebpBQmcpFj8NxKVrxHBA/QzeW4m/6DohzpTULif6hxt0zncFSkqJZCnLNKArKMBZUh afQ0GoFOo7UcfzijC7tiLXoKqdO03AaQUwMzg= Received: by 10.142.140.14 with SMTP id n14mr102700wfd.247.1222994488185; Thu, 02 Oct 2008 17:41:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?130.216.38.124? (stf-brian.sfac.auckland.ac.nz [130.216.38.124]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 24sm3390435wff.17.2008.10.02.17.41.26 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 02 Oct 2008 17:41:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <48E56A34.5060207@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2008 13:41:24 +1300 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alain Durand References: In-Reply-To: Cc: v4v6interim@ietf.org Subject: Re: [v4v6interim] Single namespace X-BeenThere: v4v6interim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of coexistence topics for the 01-Oct-2008 v4-v6 coexistence interim meeting List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: v4v6interim-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: v4v6interim-bounces@ietf.org On 2008-10-03 02:40, Alain Durand wrote: > > > On 10/1/08 5:20 PM, "Brian E Carpenter" wrote: > >> Although DNS64 is even more offensive to the computer science >> view, I can't see any realistic solution to the v4only/v6 only >> interworking problem that doesn't *require* different views >> of the namespace on the two sides, created dynamically to >> match the translation state. > > In the case of v6->v4, there is actually a solution that *does*not*require* > creating different views of the namespace. The v6 host can use its IPv4 > stack with Dual-stack lite, and the problem goes away entirely. Agreed. But if you have a true v6-only scenario in the host, that doesn't work. I agree with those who've said we'd better document this issue rather than pretending it isn't real. Brian _______________________________________________ v4v6interim mailing list v4v6interim@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v4v6interim