[v6ops] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-deployment-07: (with COMMENT)

[Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-deployment-07: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-deployment/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

(1) Section 5.  Is there an informative reference that can be made about the
successful deployment on cellular networks?

(2) Section 7.  Consider adding an explicit statement such as the following
after the intro sentence that “no new security considerations are added”:

As noted in the relevant sections above, the NAT64 and DNS64 technologies can
impact the efficacy or functionality of key security (i.e., DNSSEC and VPNs)
and privacy preserving (i.e., DNS-over-TLS and DNS-over-HTTP) technologies.

(3) Editorial Nits

** Section 1.  Editorial. s/today unrealistic/unrealistic today/

** Section 5.  Typo.  s/learn he/learn the/

** Section 5.  Editorial.  “Hundreds of millions of users” mentioned twice.

OLD:
NAT64/464XLAT has demonstrated to be a valid choice in several scenarios
(IPv6-IPv4 and IPv4-IPv6-IPv4), with hundreds of millions of users, being the
predominant mechanism in the majority of the cellular networks (which account
for hundreds of millions of users).

NEW:
NAT64/464XLAT has demonstrated to be a valid choice in several scenarios
(IPv6-IPv4 and IPv4-IPv6-IPv4) in cellular networks which account for hundreds
of millions of users.