IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Asking for a review of draft-ietf-opsec-v6-08

Erik Kline <ek@google.com> Fri, 08 July 2016 08:36 UTC

Return-Path: <ek@google.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 D601C126579 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Jul 2016 01:36:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.127
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.127 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 t7VKBpm_ihow for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Jul 2016 01:36:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io0-x22d.google.com (mail-io0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22d]) (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 F26B012B006 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Jul 2016 01:36:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id i186so39591997iof.1 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 08 Jul 2016 01:36:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=r0Kcudw/kG3llxcH4TkxY5WZdKdUckrR0TSUn52scLQ=; b=kO6opAYuOhEztOR9MiLEnaLg3Ai01NHfzD75bLc6WmSesauXWTB/Q9n/GVNJ2y8fc9 wV0VgqYbCNA8jQ1pFCBuq+CFYsq3yDo+V7a3vsiGxsyfIE79VWj8WETg8Kd3Z3ae1qU0 Gm/yKrrW4RzwQUduJe98Ibr6EclKKNkkwZ8TfnRgUW4z5iHrFwG+BTP2ZYp+8NCQU1cf a//xzjO8Zja4yB83TF54hXOIbEOzYoGnvTvciIoZK866kwN0HCOkq7gvyOKjs93rawyA J3+q2s2qPIPe0dSkRRpB58xcdOrp5jD3S5n4FxxFWN14yrcaI8aD3QeBu5cybCthSsv0 jXlw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=r0Kcudw/kG3llxcH4TkxY5WZdKdUckrR0TSUn52scLQ=; b=hHGWaUapel+OzT6FDA/IYALQTncrer5kMM85CIWXvOQxGz2znw/V4qU6GmB+n9RmtK AuM4OA4i6VtiTJfNnGrQ+0e2AyerBxo2UBZ6TWVwYRm6h66+oDNvUaqH6Vh40njUFe3B s96lA3h7VOCf+ZsdY6BDafkyCuC0nrQMma/kxuWQi8mwLVhim+ydXJdon88fDSEr9sez W1Twt15J95JpBWjvwdJtYeDyAKkZGDJSi+3UILa3DX+oJmNQ2L6gsqW8mt6D3B1/KRET 3AaaI9s2UwzP6z6Z6egLSYq3ekqPylxIFZEVXymxqCX20Ab9GGp4te3WoBr+y7qWegCD tIvQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tKLKGD9YXzPIDqbRy54qhrW8lqjf3I8e6/24CFV7Pb7Kwo68sr9cL1ixdrZTaLqyyBwxOelVDQHflFHpDVZ
X-Received: by 10.107.39.79 with SMTP id n76mr7231658ion.145.1467967002995; Fri, 08 Jul 2016 01:36:42 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.64.67.105 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Jul 2016 01:36:23 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <D3A3D373.77252%evyncke@cisco.com>
References: <D386FF93.75916%evyncke@cisco.com> <CAAedzxqBr=ApvGTUrjNUnRmpcamkt4OH1CchcDEWgDcXRgo8Fw@mail.gmail.com> <D3A3D373.77252%evyncke@cisco.com>
From: Erik Kline <ek@google.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2016 17:36:23 +0900
Message-ID: <CAAedzxpD4FXJLBgKg2tjGz5RNBp+iFe1M2M_upL1rYDXJA7SoA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/As6w80FPXbGhFaQLsS3HkcI0e-A>
Cc: "fgont@si6networks.com" <fgont@si6networks.com>, "opsec@ietf.org" <opsec@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-opsec-v6@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-opsec-v6@ietf.org>, "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, "linkedin@xn--debrn-nva.de" <linkedin@xn--debrn-nva.de>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Asking for a review of draft-ietf-opsec-v6-08
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Fri, 08 Jul 2016 08:36:47 -0000

>>Section 2.1.2 is far too permissive for my tastes.  We need to be able
>>to say that ULA+IPv6 NAT is NOT RECOMMENDED by the IETF.
>
> I changed the end of the section 2.1.2 to reflect this. Albeit, I am
> unsure whether there is a clear statement by the IETF about not using ULA
> + NPTv6 (and I would LOVE to see such a statement)

Then please go ahead and make that statement in your document.

I, for one, will help defend it.  :-)

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email