Re: [v6ops] draft-palet-v6ops-transition-ipv4aas discussion

Hi Ole, 

Please see inline. 

Cheers,
Med

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Ole Troan [mailto:otroan@employees.org]
> Envoyé : vendredi 27 avril 2018 08:34
> À : V6 Ops List
> Cc : JORDI PALET MARTINEZ; BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN
> Objet : Re: [v6ops] draft-palet-v6ops-transition-ipv4aas discussion
> 
> 
> > As you are on it, and given the IETF recommendation in RFC6888:
> >
> >   REQ-9:  A CGN MUST implement a protocol giving subscribers explicit
> >      control over NAT mappings.  That protocol SHOULD be the Port
> >      Control Protocol [RFC6887].
> >
> > which would apply also to the PLAT, I suggest you add an item in the 464lat
> section to support RFC6970.
> 
> I think that requirement needs to be reality checked.
> Has any of the operators of CGNs deployed PCP?

[Med] Yes, I confirm. PCP is a deployment reality (DS-Lite context in particular). Please refer to the file shared by Lee about IPv6 deployments. 

 Would they allow customers to
> control NAT mappings at all?

[Med] Yes. 

 Or would that just be a different subscription
> plan?

[Med] This is part of the normal service: 
* a GUI is provided on the CPE to allow creating mappings
* an UPnP IGD/PCP IWF is enabled to allow internal hosts to instantiate mappings on the CGN.  

> For the other IPv4aaS mechanisms it isn't even an option...
> 
> From my perspective PCP from customers to control CGNs is not going to be
> deployed.

[Med] You lose! This is already deployed.

 I'd be happy to hear otherwise.
[Med] Now you are :)

> 
> Ole
> 
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Med
> >
> >> -----Message d'origine-----
> >> De : v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de JORDI PALET
> MARTINEZ
> >> Envoyé : jeudi 26 avril 2018 21:41
> >> À : V6 Ops List
> >> Objet : Re: [v6ops] draft-palet-v6ops-transition-ipv4aas discussion
> >>
> >> Hi Richard,
> >>
> >> As I've moved sections 3 & 4 to the end of the document as annexes, I've
> >> added a new small section for UPnP with your text. I think this also helps
> to
> >> clarify one of the issues raised by Lee.
> >>
> >> I'm working on all this changes with my co-authors, and if we are good
> with
> >> them, we probably will submit the new version in a couple of days or so.
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Jordi
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Mensaje original-----
> >> De: v6ops <v6ops-bounces@ietf.org> en nombre de Richard Patterson
> >> <richard@helix.net.nz>
> >> Fecha: miércoles, 25 de abril de 2018, 11:16
> >> Para: V6 Ops List <v6ops@ietf.org>
> >> Asunto: Re: [v6ops] draft-palet-v6ops-transition-ipv4aas discussion
> >>
> >>    Section 4 only briefly touches on UPnP, I'd like to propose that we
> >>    make a recommendation around its behaviour if it is enabled.
> >>
> >>    UPnP MAY be enabled on the IPv6 transition CE, for stateless
> >>    mechanisms that forward unsolicited inbound packets through to the CE.
> >>    If UPnP is enabled, the agent MUST reject any port mapping requests
> >>    for ports outside of the range(s) allocated to the IPv6 transition CE.
> >>
> >>    UPnP SHOULD be disabled for stateful mechanisms that do not forward
> >>    unsolicited inbound packets to the CE, unless implemented in
> >>    conjunction with a method to control the external port mapping, such
> >>    as IGD-PCP IWF [RFC6970].
> >>
> >>    -Richard
> >>
> >>
> >>    On 25 April 2018 at 01:38, Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On Apr 24, 2018, at 12:13 PM, STARK, BARBARA H <bs7652@att.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> But that doesn't mean I believe the draft has exactly the right set of
> >> features included. My understanding of "adoption" is that it is still
> >> possible post-adoption to discuss whether specific features / requirements
> do
> >> or don't belong. If the precise set of features and requirements must be
> >> agreed upon prior to adoption, then I would not be in support of adoption.
> >> Hopefully we aren't setting the bar that high?
> >>>
> >>> I understand "adoption as a working group draft" to mean that the
> >> working group has agreed to work on the draft. There are some working
> groups
> >> that seem to confuse "adoption as a work group draft" with "agreement to
> send
> >> it to the IESG"; I don't, but expect conversation in between those two
> >> events.
> >>>
> >>> That said, I'd like to believe that the draft is pretty close, and that
> >> changes that need to be made to it will have text offered by the people
> that
> >> want them. So - keep your cards and letters coming...
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> v6ops mailing list
> >>> v6ops@ietf.org
> >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
> >>>
> >>
> >>    _______________________________________________
> >>    v6ops mailing list
> >>    v6ops@ietf.org
> >>    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> **********************************************
> >> IPv4 is over
> >> Are you ready for the new Internet ?
> >> http://www.consulintel.es
> >> The IPv6 Company
> >>
> >> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
> >> confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of
> the
> >> individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized
> disclosure,
> >> copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if
> >> partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be
> >> considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be
> aware
> >> that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
> >> information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly
> >> prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to
> the
> >> original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> v6ops mailing list
> >> v6ops@ietf.org
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
> > _______________________________________________
> > v6ops mailing list
> > v6ops@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops