IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-icp-guidance WGLC

Gert Doering <gert@space.net> Tue, 07 August 2012 12:11 UTC

Return-Path: <gert@space.net>
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 C358E21F859F for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 05:11:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.52
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.52 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.079, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 Ngv9r-yRUdeT for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 05:11:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mobil.space.net (mobil.Space.Net [IPv6:2001:608:2:81::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5630221F8593 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 05:11:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mobil.space.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A56CDF8CAE for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 14:11:16 +0200 (CEST)
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
Received: from moebius3.space.net (moebius3.Space.Net [IPv6:2001:608:2:2::250]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D6D2F8CA1 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 14:11:16 +0200 (CEST)
Received: (qmail 5686 invoked by uid 1007); 7 Aug 2012 14:11:16 +0200
Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2012 14:11:16 +0200
From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
To: Mark ZZZ Smith <markzzzsmith@yahoo.com.au>
Message-ID: <20120807121116.GI38127@Space.Net>
References: <5F52A5BB-36F7-4CF9-9639-960C65ADFD4E@cisco.com> <1344331498.66980.YahooMailNeo@web32508.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1344331498.66980.YahooMailNeo@web32508.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
X-NCC-RegID: de.space
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, V6ops Chairs <v6ops-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, Ron Bonica <ron@bonica.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-icp-guidance 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: Tue, 07 Aug 2012 12:11:24 -0000

Hi,

On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 02:24:58AM -0700, Mark ZZZ Smith wrote:
> As for usefulness to it's target audience, I think it will be
> very useful, as perhaps it may have prevented the following ICP
> choosing to deploy an IPv6 only production network and then completely
> misusing NAT64 to try to provide IPv4 and IPv6 client facing services.

So how exactly would that be "misuse"?

It's quite reasonable to run single-stack inside, and if you need lots
of addresses, make that IPv6-only.  The outside needs to be dual-stacked,
and NAT64 (with preconfigured mappings) will do that for you, in a 
nice and stateless way.

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444            USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email