Re: [v6ops] Supporting IPv6-only Networks with NAT64 and DNS64 section of draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc6555bis-01

[<[e-mail]>]

Hi David,

I don't think your document is updating RFC6147.

Cheers,
Med

De : v6ops [mailto:[e-mail]] De la part de David Schinazi
Envoyé : jeudi 29 juin 2017 01:11
À : [e-mail]
Cc : IPv6 Ops WG
Objet : Re: [v6ops] Supporting IPv6-only Networks with NAT64 and DNS64 section of draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc6555bis-01

Absolutely, the text in RFC 6147 did not consider the scenarios described here.
I'll mark this document as updating RFC 6147 to reflect that.

David Schinazi


On Jun 28, 2017, at 15:59, [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> wrote:

Fair enough, the Dual stack example is not applicable in this section. I'm hung up that the draft says that it requires changes on in client devices because it contradicts RFC 6174 section 2 that says that current IPv6 nodes can use this mechanism without requiring any modifications.



The first option is to locate the DNS64 function in authoritative

   servers for a zone.  In this case, the authoritative server provides

   synthetic AAAA RRs for an IPv4-only host in its zone.  This is one

   type of DNS64 server.

   Another option is to locate the DNS64 function in recursive name

   servers serving end hosts.  In this case, when an IPv6-only host

   queries the name server for AAAA RRs for an IPv4-only host, the name

   server can perform the synthesis of AAAA RRs and pass them back to

   the IPv6-only initiator.  The main advantage of this mode is that

   current IPv6 nodes can use this mechanism without requiring any

   modification.

________________________________
From: David Schinazi <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
To: "[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Cc: IPv6 Ops WG <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 3:00 PM
Subject: Re: Supporting IPv6-only Networks with NAT64 and DNS64 section of draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc6555bis-01

This section is titled "Supporting IPv6-only Networks with NAT64 and DNS64", dual-stack is out of scope of this section.

Am I missing something?

Thanks,
David Schinazi


On Jun 28, 2017, at 08:54, [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> wrote:

Hi David,

Yes I have. 464XLAT or anything else is not required to be able to run DNS64/NAT64. You can run DNS64/NAT64 in combination with Dual Stack if you want to.

/S

________________________________
From: David Schinazi <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
To: "[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Cc: IPv6 Ops WG <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 8:37 AM
Subject: Re: Supporting IPv6-only Networks with NAT64 and DNS64 section of draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc6555bis-01

Hi Stephan,

Have you read the rest of that section that details the changes required on client devices?

Thanks,
David Schinazi


On Jun 28, 2017, at 08:33, "[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Hi David,

Thanks for adding the Supporting IPv6-only Networks with NAT64 and DNS64 section, I find it useful. However I don't think the below sentence from this section is accurate. I can't think of any changes that are needed on a client device to run NAT64/DNS64.

While many IPv6 transition protocols have been standardized and
   deployed, most are transparent to client devices.  The combined use
   of NAT64 [RFC6146] and DNS64 [RFC6147] is a popular solution that is
   being deployed and requires changes in client devices.

Thanks, Stephan