IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-enterprise-incremental-ipv6 WGLC

"Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke@cisco.com> Wed, 07 August 2013 14:24 UTC

Return-Path: <evyncke@cisco.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 E297D21F91CA for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Aug 2013 07:24:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.301, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_33=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 tVEFEFwsL24g for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Aug 2013 07:24:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.86.75]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EDA521F9302 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Aug 2013 07:24:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=9855; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1375885469; x=1377095069; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=oGlIdbWxAeL4kCTzIlnChAcf1N+RycdLi1TD8cMkirE=; b=jr+t39mhEU6BMifhhPro5+cm6Riya3bNWOKmx0Zpq+/acagKBNtZ5vpX gK7yn0kMkkENIx33edCBvJrbTvgQDzzrdaM+vX2dzFNp7PlZOhauNjqau +h7Wo5i0S+5bfKxd1vovEMtGNGFYW0w+BsnQXsbACQBJ4ToAFUmioreJ2 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhsFAGFXAlKtJXG9/2dsb2JhbABbgkJEgQW+R4EcFnSCJAEBAQQtPw0QAgEIEQQBAQsdBzIUCQgCBA4FCBOHdbhPj2kxBgGDGnQDiHOgPYMXgio
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.89,833,1367971200"; d="scan'208,217"; a="244653918"
Received: from rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com ([173.37.113.189]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Aug 2013 14:24:28 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x15.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x15.cisco.com [173.37.183.89]) by rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r77EOSLG005127 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 7 Aug 2013 14:24:28 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com ([169.254.5.110]) by xhc-rcd-x15.cisco.com ([173.37.183.89]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Wed, 7 Aug 2013 09:24:27 -0500
From: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke@cisco.com>
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-enterprise-incremental-ipv6 WGLC
Thread-Index: AQHOk3k0iEs+n1KrYk++vIe4m7g1OpmJzGHw
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2013 14:24:27 +0000
Message-ID: <97EB7536A2B2C549846804BBF3FD47E1131292C8@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com>
References: <201308041800.r74I03pC023049@irp-view13.cisco.com> <3374_1375690984_51FF60E8_3374_427_1_983A1D8DA0DA5F4EB747BF34CBEE5CD15C5041E1E5@PUEXCB1C.nanterre.francetelecom.fr> <8C48B86A895913448548E6D15DA7553B96E2C5@xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com> <CAKD1Yr13GK_cuvkt2LpJ1qJo2NR8eUnY-xfwMF_zWfe0P1mm9g@mail.gmail.com> <8C48B86A895913448548E6D15DA7553B96EAE7@xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com> <CAKD1Yr2_d=4uD1W4WcQ82rupjVJ4UmmQAQmtSY+aQgTXmscNUw@mail.gmail.com> <97EB7536A2B2C549846804BBF3FD47E113128FA2@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com> <CAKD1Yr2-Qsq_Yd2ku4S28SUb5qRXVbUEs7S6mNYRLZzAeO+7CQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr2-Qsq_Yd2ku4S28SUb5qRXVbUEs7S6mNYRLZzAeO+7CQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.55.185.71]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_97EB7536A2B2C549846804BBF3FD47E1131292C8xmbalnx02ciscoc_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-enterprise-incremental-ipv6 WGLC
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, 07 Aug 2013 14:24:35 -0000

Lorenzo

You have a very valid point about documenting the source-destination routing on the same 'foot' as NPT6.

And of course, we are in agreement on NPT6 breaking applications (probably less though than NAPT)

-éric

From: Lorenzo Colitti [mailto:lorenzo@google.com]
Sent: mercredi 7 août 2013 16:20
To: Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
Cc: Fred Baker (fred); v6ops@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-enterprise-incremental-ipv6 WGLC

On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <evyncke@cisco.com<mailto:evyncke@cisco.com>> wrote:
-       Having the internal network up when DHCP-PD is failing because WAN link is down (at least they keep ULA and loose only their GUA), this should be mentioned in our I-D

I think we all agree that ULA + GUA is an accepted use case that should go into this document as well. Are you saying that ULA-only should to into this document as well? I don't think there is consensus on that.

-       Having a simple and cheap way to do multi-homing, search about multi-homing, load-balancing, ... for SMB and those boxes uses RFC 1918 inside + NAT towards two ISP or two links (xDSL & 4G)... Not all SMB will get a PI space and will run BGP.

That's why we're working on source+destination based routing, which is a much better solution than anything involving translation. and since this is an IETF document, I think it should document src+dst routing (which is gaining consensus and has a lot of work going on around it in various working groups) over ULA-only, whose only reason for existence is "it's similar to what we do in IPv4, which we all hate".

-éric (and YES I dislike NAPT for breaking apps, and making security worse)

NPTv6 breaks apps too. For example, it will break anything using libjingle (e.g., Google video chat).

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email