Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-05.txt

["Fred Baker (fred)" <[e-mail]>]

On Dec 15, 2013, at 11:10 PM, Lorenzo Colitti <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I notice that this draft cites draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations , which is still under discussion. I assume that means that even if this document passes IETF last call and IESG review, it cannot be published as an RFC until draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations is ready to be published.
> 
> The citation of draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations doesn't seem to be used for any particular purpose, it just seems to be mentioned in passing. Authors - if you want this document to be published quickly, you might want to remove the citation

True for normative references; this is informative, which the argument doesn't hold for.

The statement in the draft is

   Unique Local Addresses (ULAs) are defined in [RFC4193] to be
   renumbered within a network site for local communications.  Operators
   may use ULAs as NAT64 prefixes to provide site-local IPv6
   connectivity.  Those ULA prefixes are stripped when the packets going
   to the IPv4 Internet, therefore ULAs are only valid in the IPv6 site.
   The use of ULAs could help in identifying the translation
   traffic.[I-D.ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations] has provided
   further guidance for the ULAs usages.

what, specifically, is your objection?

> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:52 AM, Fred Baker (fred) <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Folks: we have been around this block several times, and I'd like to bring it to closure. This updates addresses comments raised in a WGLC in September. My objective is to determine whether there are any remaining issues, and if not, send it to the IESG. I would like to *not* find issues in the IETF WGLC coming from this community - I really want to deal with these here. So...
> 
> let's take until 20 December to discuss this - WGLC.
> 
> On Dec 8, 2013, at 7:37 PM, [e-mail] wrote:
> 
> >
> > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> > This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the IETF.
> >
> >       Title           : NAT64 Operational Experience
> >       Author(s)       : Gang Chen
> >                          Zhen Cao
> >                          Chongfeng Xie
> >                          David Binet
> >       Filename        : draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-05.txt
> >       Pages           : 21
> >       Date            : 2013-12-08
> >
> > Abstract:
> >   This document summarizes NAT64 function deployment scenarios and
> >   operational experience.  Both NAT64 Carrier Grade NAT (NAT64-CGN) and
> >   NAT64 server Front End (NAT64-FE) are considered in this document.
> >
> >
> > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience
> >
> > There's also a htmlized version available at:
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-05
> >
> > A diff from the previous version is available at:
> > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-05
> >
> >
> > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> >
> > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > v6ops mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
> 
> 

If at first the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it.  
Albert Einstein