Re: [v6ops] Comments on 464xlat-00

[Masanobu Kawashima <[e-mail]>]

Hi Washam,

Thank you for your useful comments. Please see inline.

>> The 464XLAT does not require DNS Proxy for both IPv4 and IPv6 hosts.
>> IPv6 host may directly query an IPv6 DNS server.  IPv4 host may also
>> directly query an IPv4 DNS server through 464XLAT translation.
>> DNS Proxy is useful function for IPv4 host so the host can not easily
>> discover an IPv4 DNS server address.
>
>Got it. But it seemed to me that such DNS Proxy is required when I
>read section 7.4.

I'm sorry for confusing you. I took similar question from Brian
a few weeks ago. We will add some clarifying language in the next version.
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/current/msg11853.html


>i was referring to the configuration function which allows the PLAT
>and CLAT not to include the Fragment Header.

The function provide a configuration function to adjust minimum IPv6 MTU,
or can configure whether it include the Fragment Header.


>> If CLAT gets a single /64 prefix from WAN interface, it has to perform
>> ND for 464XLAT IPv6 addresses(It means that IPv4 host under CLAT),
>> and it has to perform ND-Proxy for IPv6 host under CLAT.
>
>Do you mean ND for the translated ipv6 addresses where ipv4 addresses
>assigned to the hosts under CLAT are embeded?

Yes, exactly.


>If yes, then i think you need to clarify in this section because this
>section is too vague.

I agree with you. We will add some clarifying language about this in
the next version.


>My point was ND can perform even the prefix != 64, cant it? And when
>you say ND, are you referring to DAD or full functionality of ND?

Would you mind clarifying what you meant by that?
If CLAT gets a single /64 prefix from WAN interface, it has to perform
full functionality of ND for 464XLAT IPv6 addresses.


>> This 464XLAT architecture is hub and spoke model.
>>
>Would you mind clarify this scope in somewhere in the draft?

We will add some language in somewhere in next version. :-)

Regards,
Masanobu


>Hi,
>
>>> 1. section 7.4 mentioned DNS proxy for both IPv4 and IPv6 hosts, i
>>> don't know why DNS proxy for IPv6 hosts is needed.
>>
>>
>> The 464XLAT does not require DNS Proxy for both IPv4 and IPv6 hosts.
>> IPv6 host may directly query an IPv6 DNS server.  IPv4 host may also
>> directly query an IPv4 DNS server through 464XLAT translation.
>> DNS Proxy is useful function for IPv4 host so the host can not easily
>> discover an IPv4 DNS server address.
>
>Got it. But it seemed to me that such DNS Proxy is required when I
>read section 7.4.
>
>>> 2. I think the author should elaborate on what the configuration
>>> function is like in section 7.6
>>
>>
>> I do not know where your consideraton about this configuration
>> function is.
>> Could you please specifically indicate about your consideraton?
>> I think we can make a appropriate document by yours.
>>
>i was referring to the configuration function which allows the PLAT
>and CLAT not to include the Fragment Header.
>
>>> 3. i don't know what is the meaning for the text under section 7.5. I
>>> think NDP should always perform while SLAAC perform only if the prefix
>>> equals to 64.
>>
>>
>> If CLAT gets a single /64 prefix from WAN interface, it has to perform
>> ND for 464XLAT IPv6 addresses(It means that IPv4 host under CLAT),
>> and it has to perform ND-Proxy for IPv6 host under CLAT.
>>
>
>Do you mean ND for the translated ipv6 addresses where ipv4 addresses
>assigned to the hosts under CLAT are embeded? If yes, then i think you
>need to clarify in this section because this section is too vague.
>
>My point was ND can perform even the prefix != 64, cant it? And when
>you say ND, are you referring to DAD or full functionality of ND?
>
>>> 4. I don't know if the draft should cover the host1-CLAT1-CLAT2-host2
>>> communication case.
>>
>>
>> This 464XLAT architecture is hub and spoke model.
>>
>Would you mind clarify this scope in somewhere in the draft?
>
>Thanks,
>washam
>_______________________________________________
>v6ops mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

========================================
 NEC AccessTechnica, Ltd.               
 Product Development Department         
 Masanobu Kawashima                     
 [e-mail]               
 http://www.necat.co.jp/                
========================================