IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] draft-palet-v6ops-nat64-deployment-02 comments

<mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> Mon, 02 July 2018 09:39 UTC

Return-Path: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.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 CC222130F06 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 02:39:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 PtYC-8BG4oy3 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 02:39:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from orange.com (mta135.mail.business.static.orange.com [80.12.70.35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE93D130FA0 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 02:39:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from opfednr07.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.71]) by opfednr26.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 30A712078B; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 11:39:27 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown [xx.xx.31.10]) by opfednr07.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 18E911C0067; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 11:39:27 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::60a9:abc3:86e6:2541]) by OPEXCLILM5C.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::4bd:9b2b:3651:6fba%19]) with mapi id 14.03.0399.000; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 11:39:26 +0200
From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
To: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>, "v6ops@ietf.org list" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] draft-palet-v6ops-nat64-deployment-02 comments
Thread-Index: AQHUEV+cTtxO//4IIkic/OGTVZ0VhKR69ruAgAC2bZA=
Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 09:39:26 +0000
Message-ID: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93302DF4F296@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <663F489C-7F63-4B0C-A5E6-F7EE4634E62B@gmail.com> <60335039-287e-4fb3-870b-2c4fe9b5445d@otenet.gr> <2D196DD1-FF0F-4365-8F50-5AD98DCBA989@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <2D196DD1-FF0F-4365-8F50-5AD98DCBA989@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.168.234.6]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/Kp39fIQo3aBy9Wkt92toeyYp-6k>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-palet-v6ops-nat64-deployment-02 comments
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
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: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 09:39:39 -0000

Hi Jordi, all,

V6ops has published "NAT64 Deployment Options and Experience" (RFC7269). You may want position your draft vs. that RFC. 

Thank you. 

Cheers,
Med

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Fred Baker
> Envoyé : lundi 2 juillet 2018 02:42
> À : v6ops@ietf.org list
> Objet : Re: [v6ops] draft-palet-v6ops-nat64-deployment-02 comments
> 
> OK, I see enough interest in taking this to the next step. I have instructed
> Jordi to refile draft-palet-v6ops-nat64-deployment as draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-
> deployment.
> 
> > On Jul 1, 2018, at 10:18 AM, Yannis Nikolopoulos <yanodd@otenet.gr> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > as with all such documents, this has a potential to help those starting
> with such a transition. So, I support the draft's intention
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Yannis
> >
> > On 06/27/2018 08:04 PM, Fred Baker wrote:
> >> Chair comment: I am interested in making this draft a working group draft.
> I think there is merit in it to do so. However, following our usual process,
> I need agreement from the working group. Consider this a solicitation for
> that. To do so, I'm looking for comments, supportive or otherwise, especially
> from operators. To respond to Barbara's question that she raised with
> ipv4aas, making it a working group document doesn't mean it's done, it means
> it's a work item as opposed to a suggestion to the working group.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email