[v6ops] draft minutes, ietf84 friday 0900

joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> Sun, 12 August 2012 21:53 UTC

Return-Path: <joelja@bogus.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F29B021F85ED for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 14:53:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.219
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.219 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.380, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AvICyBGoz6Kc for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 14:53:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 400CD21F85E4 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 14:53:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from joels-MacBook-Air.local (2.sub-166-250-33.myvzw.com [166.250.33.2]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q7CLrKYs007690 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 21:53:21 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com)
Message-ID: <50282231.3000307@bogus.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 14:37:53 -0700
From: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120731 Thunderbird/15.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: IPv6 Ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Sun, 12 Aug 2012 21:53:21 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [v6ops] draft minutes, ietf84 friday 0900
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 21:53:30 -0000

Friday  August 3nd

Semantic IPv6 Prefix
16-Jul-12, <draft-jiang-semantic-prefix>
http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/84/slides/slides-84-v6ops-4.pdf

George M -
outside of your locous of control it can't be trusted -

fred -
help me understand the semantics of ip addressing
at a car manufacturer, they want to embedd the vin number or building number
they don't seem to have the same problems as you're looking at.

Give me a use case

Jaing -

they have a different understanding of use case

George M-
a pragmatic dicision was made to walk from the tla model.
there was an architure that put proscriptive labels on addresses

Wes G -
Renumbering is not an easy thing

difficulty of merging two addressing planes

Dan Y -
You have a security section with no security considerations.

Tim C -
at the heart of it an address planning issue.

pros/cons for this sort of approach.

kk -
Implied suggestion that applications become aware of address semantics. 
Seem like a really bad idea.

fred -
As soon sa you put semantics in an address by defintion you're revealing 
information.

NAT64 Operational Experiences
4-Jul-12, <draft-chen-v6ops-nat64-experience>
http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/84/slides/slides-84-v6ops-2.pdf

Cameron Byrne presenting

Dan Y - thinks it's goo to have a document like this
we know this in operational use

Wes george -
would I recomend it?
compared to nat444 absolutely
inherent mistrust of things that don't perpetuate what we've already done
yes this does work. it's not a corner case.

  cb -
  6145 46 44 great for box builders
this doc sets this in context for an operational network

  dan york -
  I think it's exactly the sort of doc we should have

Fred B -
right now not a wg document do we want to do that
hum (many in favor) (none opposed.)

Cameron B -
I'd say it needs more work prioro to last call

464XLAT: Combination of Stateful and Stateless Translation
2-Jul-12, <draft-ietf-v6ops-464xlat>
http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/84/slides/slides-84-v6ops-5.pdf

lorenzo c-
didn't understand the distinction can you explain
the clat is assigned a real v6 address where the dest is synthesized

fred b -
as one of the authors of 6052 - I might have to do a stateful thing or I 
imght have an embdded v4 address
there's a neccestiy packets go to the service to which they are intended

Remi D -
Question on the iana section

Ron B -
It's fine

lorenzo c -
it's fine and it came from your request for a special interface id
if it's a procedural problem then we can not do it.

Remi D -
keeping it simlifies the design.

On the question of bcp vs informational

Lorenzo C -
You don't have to do dap?(DAD) for those address because they're reserved.
I don't have strong opinion.

Remi D -
double translation loses transparency.

Cameron B-
We have taken care in the document that this is not the greatest 
solution but it fills the gap.
This is a way to operationalize nat64 dns64 to meet our customers needs.

Lorenzo C -
The work in softwire is higher quality but it's signficantly harder to 
deploy.
lets unblock turning on v6 in the network.

Lorenzo C-
It is the best current practice within a narrow usage case -

dave thayler -
Nothing new to speficy new or algorythms.
do this, bcp

Fred B -
if it goes bcp it's bcp in a use case.

applicabiltiy statement.

Ron B -
put the statement in the bcp

Fred -
  we did adopt this as a wg document.

hum  we'll take this to wg last call
(some in favor none opposed.)
hum in favor of bcp/informational/experimental

some for bcp some for informational none for experimental

IPv6 over ATM Interworking Function
16-Jul-12, <draft-zhang-v6ops-ipv6oa-iwf>
http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/84/slides/slides-84-v6ops-3.pdf

Fred B - question - internet architecturel has a defined internetworking 
function (a router) which you didn't use.

Zhang -
don't know how to answer this

Wes G -
Where did you find a dslam that does atm but speaks ipv6

Zhang -
Came from from china telecom

Lorenzo C -
A large number of these devices are doing ipoe which doesn't support v6. 
I think you might be willing to replace the bng and do you want.

Fred B -
I will invite you to discuss it on the list.