Re: [v6ops] [BEHAVE] protocols without need for ALG ?

On 01/08/2015 01:37, Ca By wrote:
> On Thursday, July 30, 2015, Toerless Eckert <eckert@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
>> For autonomic networking (ANIMA WG), we are planning to rely only on IPv6
>> for initial
>> autonomic connectivity, and the question of connecting this (at least
>> initially)
>> to IPv4 only NOC equipment came up. Alas, IPv6 support in transport seems
>> to be still
>> weak on a range of commonly used NOC tools.
>>
>>
> Ehhh. For something as forward looking as anima , it is unfortunate that
> you believe you will need to bring this technical debt with you.

Yes, but we assume that during the phasing-in of autonomic operations,
we will be forced to interface to legacy NOCs. Personally I think I
disagree with NAT46 and NAT64 as the way to handle this, but Toerless
is asking the right questions in order to have this debate over on the
Anima list.

    Brian

> 
> My suggeation is that you require ipv6 for this case. If you do not shed
> this requirement now, you will carry it with you forever.
> 
> The iphone can require ipv6 apps, so can anima.
> 
> CB
> 
> 
>> If i understand the NAT RFCs and behave output correctly, we primaerily
>> want ALGs to go the way of the dodo, so i was wondering if there might be
>> any crucial protocols between typical NOC equipment and network devices
>> that
>> would require ALGs. And better of course:knowing which protocols would be
>> fine
>> without ALG.
>>
>> Are there any lists about this (eg: what requires ALG ?)
>>
>> Wrt to what seems to be important between NOC and network devices:
>>
>>    FTP     - NOK (requires ALG) - IMHO not a problem
>>    traceroute - ??  (initiated from v4 NOC) ??
>>    telnet  - OK
>>    ping    - OK ?
>>    SSH/SCP - OK
>>    syslog  - OK
>>    TFTP    - OK ?
>>    radius  - OK ? (i ran some tests, seemed to be fine)
>>    diameter/tacacs+ - OK ?
>>    NTP     - OK ???
>>
>>    For the following, that have extensible data-models (MIBs/OIDs, XML
>> schema etc.),
>>    i can see that some NOC tools relying on them might not support
>> data-models
>>    with IPv6, but that would be "fine" (aka: can't manage everything from
>> such tools,
>>    but transport stack works):
>>
>>    netconf - OK ?
>>    SNMP    - OK ?
>>
>> Whats the next most important NOC<->network management protocols... ?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>     Toerless
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> v6ops mailing list
>> v6ops@ietf.org <javascript:;>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>>
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Behave mailing list
> Behave@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave
> 