IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] 464xlat case study (was reclassify 464XLAT as standard instead of info)

Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 25 September 2017 19:06 UTC

Return-Path: <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.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 47018134553 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 12:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3lMtR0lUwyhd for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 12:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi0-x231.google.com (mail-oi0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07629134552 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 12:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi0-x231.google.com with SMTP id l74so8476777oih.1 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 12:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=IUJPnaxGte30nOUoff7TP6lqxNZ43KushpF9xHEdC5c=; b=TWkV53H/m7XiBsLwUD0Ztio/SnphExZg4pqeMIzrpmFm4XIsSLrYwv10p+JEitw4tc lPmTvWAuzInWBurwiuhf2qiilzC7LCW9GGUPxwJVvlq9eOuN3dM1cplxJxwl05ZMi8P/ mkimLqqVFw9cQx9K0OG4G2VecEO9WYv6XJW4sVADVqjtM1zq2q1hYmUQk8kERQ6O/Ej3 Xq8KHNKxleQh5SMHxf+OKq/QLK3jjL/ex2xeRYcB3K8s3sgLWPJjAec9A2crEcrBf8G6 Vho9beUIOAGRtMosqGxDGgU1/reW4LtwyO8tcG81CcaJInqn6oLU9tRYItX5iu0etef0 0DGA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=IUJPnaxGte30nOUoff7TP6lqxNZ43KushpF9xHEdC5c=; b=G7/omBJ+QrhON7ixHxxqVVaSD8EuRWPg6c1YpJSSWF07ZYja4y5xRirkn2Z29SREKZ RMeMit9Hhg+MYXLR510L5k0tSZrxg4Lg5vKfgAt8gywglo1AKxMS9p8xyAr1M+Wlj7vt N+gViqPJ+ZW0nyDYM39Il/oIu0Jg6b6IQj/valgGp5fAfbTx3bRplyR8Fq6T3tEg6AQo OTDzt1aZzvDr0mCS2m744kCSVEyM1Mu7jUJlaml+TdV/oTkssuijVWS7N6UQgHwqRvE7 EXZ5GjMKwOTk8WSliiHmp9dTSV9vzqdhkZOnJF4DkLtr4pjaS5XW7KQ8hV9nqhMEpRkf PcSw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUgj1/Ek2qo/xS1cHJZPVkQnrI+AsbdH1fvsuhLcyTsFnxXJwYP/ 0kRK7MrAc2H7g1v0/dIrGIU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QDzopJ3RL2rt896UYEoCuqRQAMCJPRb7t2LZJKB2WhsG9RpbMzcu2dZMDrl1vvyqYlvQ46aGA==
X-Received: by 10.157.44.199 with SMTP id e7mr688439otd.75.1506366375455; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 12:06:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2600:8802:5600:e::163f? ([2600:8802:5600:e::163f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w43sm405683ota.9.2017.09.25.12.06.14 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 25 Sep 2017 12:06:14 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.0 \(3445.1.6\))
From: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <b0b09e49-ad0a-4693-d4d0-1e398f244b5d@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 12:06:13 -0700
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <71DC2E77-20D3-4EC8-95B1-96070DA135E7@gmail.com>
References: <LO1P123MB01168388285206BB7C26F029EA7A0@LO1P123MB0116.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <b0b09e49-ad0a-4693-d4d0-1e398f244b5d@gmail.com>
To: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.1.6)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/6V10w2_-8XiD1g97TtwlxaHl528>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] 464xlat case study (was reclassify 464XLAT as standard instead of info)
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 19:06:17 -0000


> On Sep 25, 2017, at 9:08 AM, Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Excuse me, what do you mean by IPv4 private address exhaustion?

Several companies, notably Microsoft and Comcast in the v6ops context, and said that they were running out not only of public space but, within their networks, private space. In the CGN context, this (in part, there were other considerations) resulted in us requesting an additional RFC 1918-like prefix for the space between a presumed NAT'd private address space and a CGN.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email