[v6ops] protocols without need for ALG ?

Toerless Eckert <eckert@cisco.com> Thu, 30 July 2015 20:58 UTC

Return-Path: <eckert@cisco.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 3EC761A904F; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 13:58:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -13.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, J_BACKHAIR_37=1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 P84tSwZrt2ZC; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 13:58:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0FEB11A9046; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 13:58:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1478; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1438289889; x=1439499489; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:mime-version; bh=HsrA8YTEcWcRTqWajoyXXGO6ukyWmKsZPE7ssL0u2DA=; b=HSAzor+Uz5qm8c5Ys1UlpJT/itlifIGrUtp95W70G6fICj39T3cp2mkG FzRtqmU6EJvJJeHESOAyBXAgafXp24GNZvhNYkZ3wLKLBJchjgoiHRSRb 99zYsFCCn1CK261z1DImsM8CAypX2W3yS3Ww/zneC7vwIq9/BCX4Yz/Wg g=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CbBQBij7pV/4YNJK1cgxq9Z4k+OhIBAQEBAQEBgQqEURN7NAVKiEDFPAEBCAEBAQEBHZUIBY0/hziMRwKZOSaEHR6CfQEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,578,1432598400"; d="scan'208";a="174050088"
Received: from alln-core-12.cisco.com ([173.36.13.134]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 30 Jul 2015 20:58:08 +0000
Received: from mcast-linux1.cisco.com (mcast-linux1.cisco.com [172.27.244.121]) by alln-core-12.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t6UKw6bk027740 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 30 Jul 2015 20:58:07 GMT
Received: from mcast-linux1.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by mcast-linux1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t6UKw6tf019267; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 13:58:06 -0700
Received: (from eckert@localhost) by mcast-linux1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id t6UKw6x0019266; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 13:58:06 -0700
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 13:58:06 -0700
From: Toerless Eckert <eckert@cisco.com>
To: v6ops@ietf.org, behave@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20150730205806.GI1667@cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/Ha-kM3jW32Ah6Y2kJ70X8RLH2Cw>
Subject: [v6ops] protocols without need for ALG ?
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: <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: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 20:58:09 -0000

For autonomic networking (ANIMA WG), we are planning to rely only on IPv6 for initial
autonomic connectivity, and the question of connecting this (at least initially)
to IPv4 only NOC equipment came up. Alas, IPv6 support in transport seems to be still
weak on a range of commonly used NOC tools.

If i understand the NAT RFCs and behave output correctly, we primaerily
want ALGs to go the way of the dodo, so i was wondering if there might be
any crucial protocols between typical NOC equipment and network devices that
would require ALGs. And better of course:knowing which protocols would be fine
without ALG.

Are there any lists about this (eg: what requires ALG ?)

Wrt to what seems to be important between NOC and network devices:

   FTP     - NOK (requires ALG) - IMHO not a problem
   traceroute - ??  (initiated from v4 NOC) ??
   telnet  - OK 
   ping    - OK ?
   SSH/SCP - OK
   syslog  - OK
   TFTP    - OK ?
   radius  - OK ? (i ran some tests, seemed to be fine)
   diameter/tacacs+ - OK ?
   NTP     - OK ???

   For the following, that have extensible data-models (MIBs/OIDs, XML schema etc.),
   i can see that some NOC tools relying on them might not support data-models
   with IPv6, but that would be "fine" (aka: can't manage everything from such tools,
   but transport stack works):

   netconf - OK ?
   SNMP    - OK ?

Whats the next most important NOC<->network management protocols... ?

Thanks!
    Toerless