[v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-02.txt comments

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Wed, 10 July 2013 08:01 UTC

Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
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 902CE21F9F5E for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 01:01:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 EvumPXVGwuJn for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 01:01:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (ipv6.swm.pp.se [IPv6:2a00:801::f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A399A21F9C00 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 01:01:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id A07AE9C; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 10:01:12 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93F4F9A for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 10:01:12 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 10:01:12 +0200
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: v6ops@ietf.org
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1307101000270.8891@uplift.swm.pp.se>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Subject: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-02.txt comments
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: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 08:01:15 -0000

2013/7/10, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>:
> On Tue, 9 Jul 2013, GangChen wrote:
>
>> Hi Mikael,
>>
>> Thanks for the message. We are also doing the NAT64 testing recently.
>> Some experiences have been documented in
>> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-02.txt
>> Not sure if you have interests to read and comment
>
> 1. "Single stack IPv6 network deployment can simplify the network
>     provisioning. ". I would remove "the" frmo this sentence.
>
> I think it's good that you stress the benefit of having access being
> single stack instead of dual stack.
>
> 3.1
>
> I think it might be beneficial to say a little bit more here why 464xlat
> is important, perhaps just one sentence "464XLAT enables access of IPv4
> only applications or applications that call IPv4 literal addresses" (or
> similar).
>
> About geo-location, perhaps it can be adviced to chop up the outside IPv4
> address pool so that IPv6 addresses are NAT64:ed depending on their
> geographical location (we're doing this on a per country basis).
>
> 5.1
>
> I would like some text on "port block allocation", where a customer gets
> 512 or 1024 ports, this is logged, which means as long as the same
> customer still has this 512 port block, no further logging is needed.
>
>
>
> Apart from that the document looks good, and nothing more came to mind
> when I read it.
>
>
> --
> Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se
>