[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.
- [v6ops] draft minutes, ietf84 friday 0900 joel jaeggli