IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] IPv6 mostly for DS-Lite

Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> Wed, 20 March 2024 20:00 UTC

Return-Path: <marka@isc.org>
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 58228C14F69E for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 13:00:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.107
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.107 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isc.org header.b="eoO3P6ug"; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isc.org header.b="obzcLwdK"
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LDNlM7oK_PXe for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 13:00:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.pao1.isc.org (mx.pao1.isc.org [149.20.2.50]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56082C14F6FE for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 13:00:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zimbrang.isc.org (zimbrang.isc.org [149.20.2.31]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx.pao1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3F10B3AB1B7; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 20:00:48 +0000 (UTC)
ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 mx.pao1.isc.org 3F10B3AB1B7
Authentication-Results: mx.pao1.isc.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=149.20.2.31
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=isc.org; s=ostpay; t=1710964848; cv=none; b=rgs0EA/3oQVnoh+10t1T064tCDKPUZSyjT2UrTmCIA9APfIRrAaYnS0i8rNdp4PiNpzJfbQjK9ciVbj/gF+AyWaZgYjmb8Zj/bCGlpMjXIGqnCUtVAjGEYMqf4H1xLa+TOP/g44ZufEZKIGRRckwPieOEkRMvVFSPSioK6xzvck=
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=isc.org; s=ostpay; t=1710964848; c=relaxed/relaxed; bh=ipz7QcwhCUv9eBtQMIJlstJSjWm+5p/Eo2wwhjbjLQQ=; h=DKIM-Signature:DKIM-Signature:From:Mime-Version:Subject:Date: Message-Id:To; b=DuutwR8RKnuQDui10m2xYP/rGejVSUt/ZnBq+5XWWqaM8uOPlqV3Q71uQcRMYM9YcoadoHaKWwrqTNxqHRrMRpbWVbu54nhOKPzWEAquFKfYhfD4TqUJMQGh9zDq6ai08zlSqEjHaDbQ2QzXB7artouvEP2eIeJnZ+hsjqHUbLk=
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.pao1.isc.org
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 mx.pao1.isc.org 3F10B3AB1B7
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=isc.org; s=ostpay; t=1710964848; bh=b8wxXlVL2DavwRVVvnlfgOTkMz846YwMBzo81T58/20=; h=From:Subject:Date:References:Cc:In-Reply-To:To; b=eoO3P6ug3HZ3U6afKBFaZ3YcEFaS+cDqq+R3hVmkzustaN37hQmArViXop0EYfp76 TY3csSBqc3lbYiw9VHN8nTm7CkEYT18vDfSqAS25mwxvy7L3jhYCwr+66mtihp5o5M x9B8qZnalQmn+HTsp6ogrfih8MiWZnZSXWekPv+o=
Received: from zimbrang.isc.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zimbrang.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78A621000CE3; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 20:00:47 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zimbrang.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 522431000CE8; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 20:00:47 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 zimbrang.isc.org 522431000CE8
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isc.org; s=05DFB016-56A2-11EB-AEC0-15368D323330; t=1710964847; bh=ipz7QcwhCUv9eBtQMIJlstJSjWm+5p/Eo2wwhjbjLQQ=; h=From:Mime-Version:Date:Message-Id:To; b=obzcLwdKWPB5ktjIiUpZuKd4xH6FteSPKQpWVLhZ2ZuT8xQyy5IiWa2Sk6d4RquZE xLlumGAvBHBFo3vC/xqz9mVPBSujOnFIyIor5raopR59i/OEzap1oKIfjfCJwVma7y hVU9X2voVuLctOf9rgXb/dqgcsimTKFJAJm48t9M=
Received: from zimbrang.isc.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbrang.isc.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10026) with ESMTP id jngsZUfkSSgP; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 20:00:47 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (n49-187-18-238.bla1.nsw.optusnet.com.au [49.187.18.238]) by zimbrang.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 167D81000CE3; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 20:00:47 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2024 07:00:44 +1100
Message-Id: <D6FA6215-DB44-47AE-AB5B-9C5DD51E08EA@isc.org>
References: <6de22cfd-b845-bd65-5b79-bc05f1eee1e8@gmail.com>
Cc: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>, v6ops <v6ops@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <6de22cfd-b845-bd65-5b79-bc05f1eee1e8@gmail.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (19H380)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/EorpF65gfnflID0rXrnVG1VZckU>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] IPv6 mostly for DS-Lite
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 20:00:53 -0000

I don’t see why we don’t make it work for every IPV6AAS.  It’s just a DHCPv4 option. We could most probably extend 108 to support it with a list of methods in the payload after the wait timer. No list implies 464XLAT.  The node would set its supported methods and the DHCP server would match against the methods it is configured for.  A registry of methods would be required.
-- 
Mark Andrews

> On 21 Mar 2024, at 06:34, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On 20-Mar-24 23:04, Mark Andrews wrote:
>> So ISPs have to back out DS-lite and deploy NAT64 just so people can deploy IPv6 mostly. We have provided a number of IPV4AAS mechanisms which all work at the node level as well as CPE level.  It should be possible to support any of them.
> 
> Is anybody saying that IPv6-mostly is mandatory? I don't see why an ISP that currently runs DS-lite is forced to rip it out. DHCP 108 won't work, that's all.
> 
>    Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email