IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-04.txt

Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> Thu, 14 November 2013 09:17 UTC

Return-Path: <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
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 5AD2221E808F for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 01:17:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.516
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.516 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.082, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 jVDEsmqeHX80 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 01:17:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F70821E8092 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 01:17:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost.ecs.soton.ac.uk [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id rAE9HcET019329; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 09:17:38 GMT
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk rAE9HcET019329
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=201304; t=1384420658; bh=CsyoQnKYpGgdX+kxsOAEHzKI55I=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=aM1i/Jl7r2JZye45P3UebYjoOg90idM+p/zGN3Lb/E9rP6zzlhqVK/OFLV8LyP7Cx 5qzwQWIh4UbStSUzXXDh4eiJ19d3PAVzMgw22kPjxip1MlUugupkaeIR3UcGSfD85I CyPMrfPeVZ36qmlpruKUE7s6UU4Zqd4i+4/B/ZvI=
Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk ([2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:401]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:68da]) envelope-from <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> with ESMTP (valid=N/A) id pAD9Hc09596597952U ret-id none; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 09:17:38 +0000
Received: from [192.168.0.26] (5ad35a35.bb.sky.com [90.211.90.53] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id rAE9HWtD016714 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 14 Nov 2013 09:17:33 GMT
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_9A6FAEA2-1A10-48ED-A18C-47BDB214D09F"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1822\))
From: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <52849009.80408@fud.no>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 09:17:32 +0000
Message-ID: <EMEW3|4580d6d3d7e7ef56092c0bcb14acc587pAD9Hc03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|0154CE2C-C5EF-44FB-9B6D-5B2077267329@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
References: <97EB7536A2B2C549846804BBF3FD47E1237E18A6@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1311050329470.26054@uplift.swm.pp.se> <97EB7536A2B2C549846804BBF3FD47E1237E1941@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com> <CAM+vMES=xhq7VF8SvqEZEz3ZCRN8p1zWiabkNnU6ucKVya6KQQ@mail.gmail.com> <6536E263028723489CCD5B6821D4B21303A137B3@UK30S005EXS06.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK> <20131108172730.GM81676@Space.Net> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1311090926500.26054@uplift.swm.pp.se> <20131109132552.GQ81676@Space.Net> <6536E263028723489CCD5B6821D4B21303A157F2@UK30S005EXS06.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK> <CAM+vMET6mqVQOm4GVnfkvNEGYuVSvTBVnrPOgFvj86Kmx8rnfw@mail.gmail.com> <20131111145452.GF81676@Space.Net> <52849009.80408@fud.no> <0154CE2C-C5EF-44FB-9B6D-5B2077267329@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: Tore Anderson <tore@fud.no>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1822)
X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
X-smtpf-Report: sid=pAD9Hc095965979500; tid=pAD9Hc09596597952U; client=relay,forged,no_ptr,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=4:0; fails=0
X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: rAE9HcET019329
X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-04.txt
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: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 09:17:51 -0000

On 14 Nov 2013, at 08:55, Tore Anderson <tore@fud.no> wrote:

> * Gert Doering
> 
>> How does the UE know that a target can be reached by native IPv4 if 
>> DNS64 tells it "there is IPv6 for you" and IPv6 is preferred to IPv4?
> 
> One could use a ULA prefix for DNS64/NAT64, which would make native IPv4
> be preferred according to RFC 6724.

A related discussion came up some time ago when we were discussing 3484-bis that became 6724:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/current/msg13709.html

That was about the NAT64 WKP appearing - or being added to - the 6724 policy table.  There is now a DHCPv6 option for that.

Tim

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email