Re: [v6ops] The need for local-ipv4 socket transition solutions -- NAT64/DNS64 remains insufficient

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Thu, 23 April 2015 21:17 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A32F1B3488 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Apr 2015 14:17:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 NjZfDo-r-tAQ for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Apr 2015 14:17:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com (sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com [64.89.234.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBF021B3483 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Apr 2015 14:17:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-04.win.nominum.com [64.89.235.67]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certificate Authority - G2" (verified OK)) by sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54BBEDA007D; Thu, 23 Apr 2015 21:17:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [10.0.20.108] (71.233.43.215) by CAS-04.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.224.2; Thu, 23 Apr 2015 14:17:03 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADhXe52_-bjkVucs-+O7vworEE32vcuQ1vSGL__MwUmXXQVz3g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 17:17:00 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <C0BEA08B-03EA-4594-919B-267E9E6CC9F4@nominum.com>
References: <CAD6AjGT-hG-uvRQvRosrZtfrf0Nb8ne9jy=tD9oh=5zNM42Xsg@mail.gmail.com> <CAD6AjGTcKgK8W+VB1H5EQpHaYiKVYXqOz_2RS-w_CiTf9kL2CQ@mail.gmail.com> <CADhXe530+OVZrFZVaYh1-zoRDvJhUd0rf4sx6a2nO8SvKmm6zg@mail.gmail.com> <CAPi140PQ+TF0rED_bQPeS=Fj415qt0-zE2RdGnEL34PAzHyx6Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAD6AjGTjXAeMF6pw5MO2Jrf9B8LJ48D3m1YTVkdBe=_OHjtroQ@mail.gmail.com> <CADhXe51TCqU2eMP4LS3DooZxQDAPD95OVJDXbiU7qvuvKCMq+w@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr2=zc57+pOA9TFs+0azw0ZR1g67+08T=9eZPHjGXBvgFQ@mail.gmail.com> <CADhXe53T_30pj7xxwNs=mWEnd=do6oiq3KgN=U-gHLrLF-gG7Q@mail.gmail.com> <D1441574.4C168%wesley.george@twcable.com> <CAD6AjGQrzoBJrqQfKO0N8Ji=oJ-ZP6Sn88sXf=opJ6bYVmTDZg@mail.gmail.com> <552102B0.6070904@cernet.edu.cn> <35D97B17-8E83-43CF-ABEF-122572F1321A@eircom.net> <552369C8.5000801@cernet.edu.cn> <CADhXe51BDuPhc8wdKGmRiBfSnrz7PMtqYXaoDO+5cwLx_xW2tw@mail.gmail.com> <55290E26.8080500@cernet.edu.cn> <CADhXe50zz9EtNtifMh+tN9XT-jKCTJB=vsQ6uG515iddOo7f2Q@mail.gmail.com> <6536E263028723489CCD5B6821D4B21303E8C63A@UK30S005EXS06.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK> <67A2A6E4-0603-4E84-8534-EA6C706C6D5D@lists.zabbadoz.net> <6536E263028723489CCD5B6821D4B21303E8CBAB@UK30S005EXS06.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK> <0C3D10F1-B8AF-4097-91C6-D92CDDD5978D@nominum.com> <CAD6AjGR65jtZN4NV62p1XnUgoQRC+h=ELmsLcQaFTdrToMtwRA@mail.gmail.com> <CADhXe53VJeUDLpq2fpdndXF1VyPzQLTO=3LEYqbpOFmEPNbCJw@mail.gmail.com> <54AE4471-B568-4A92-B12D-137AD5950B60@nominum.com> <CADhXe52acGYR-y7VNpfXt=OQK7uqm1vNyHL3mwGhX8cpaYyW3A@mail.gmail.com> <C6523070-46D3-4D75-A2F8-3EED84BAA561@nominum.com> <CADhXe52_-bjkVucs-+O7vworEE32vcuQ1vSGL__MwUmXXQVz3g@mail.gmail.com>
To: James Woodyatt <jhw@nestlabs.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
X-Originating-IP: [71.233.43.215]
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/FO0hHXht6gamrCwTfOYPzL3NQCQ>
Cc: IPv6 Ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] The need for local-ipv4 socket transition solutions -- NAT64/DNS64 remains insufficient
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 21:17:18 -0000

On Apr 23, 2015, at 2:45 PM, James Woodyatt <jhw@nestlabs.com> wrote:
> I'm not saying IETF should obsolete the excellent work that POSIX has already done. I'm simply saying that IETF is probably the better place to define what the POSIX network programming interfaces for IPv4 are expected to do on hosts with IPv6 network interfaces and an integrated CLAT function. I further think this work would be more suitable for 6MAN than V6OPS, and until I see a standard track draft adopted, I'm going to be opposed to V6OPS adopting a work item to produce a BCP for host operating systems to implement a CLAT function.

Would you be willing to co-author such a document?