IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] new version is available: draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-03.txt

Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> Tue, 08 October 2013 10:23 UTC

Return-Path: <lorenzo@google.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 3464521E81BF for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 03:23:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.827
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.827 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
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 FTk7sp1Hh99i for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 03:23:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-x231.google.com (mail-ie0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93BDD21E8174 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 03:23:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ie0-f177.google.com with SMTP id qd12so18962450ieb.36 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 08 Oct 2013 03:23:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=PIzckDNftUmDzlpkUhsqowaOr4JR06M+ko3LjP0zntA=; b=JYFiAtOh1CWQegBHtuj45rs3G2zVEfdx6WHSx8xB9sPCLoN8XmXCVpbxzzb2vrF0jQ 3zQRU8oj8cX1WgsmoL/2anz68aYOViBw+nw6cQ8Jmi6sGMdpOF9Our5qFqS0TJmGQi8J 3O25yo4n+WugcLe4ezpy6hc9pdgqAbn6unEDqN85d+Zzy5tWkQPN4Ux9XMC2EjjlpqGG ug6NJdEBhAvsXx+S4e4lkwtNUE/yO6/ekO1L9bXV/Ku7Vb/A/APl2DKpoTvQYsQ7USJB 0+COyDAbLV24SGeqZgz/5moaFkLcNwH6j9h8zFy7ThHkGoOFHuTANQ1kcfFexGhOCoOF gtTA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=PIzckDNftUmDzlpkUhsqowaOr4JR06M+ko3LjP0zntA=; b=TGDZfZHoC9SdCeSHY2uoiqyEL5lhNecTtrytax44c2cVCOXIp18DBo589bEiwuJnwx jwuHWBdHREqKhGWvrq74C/yAz4yeI877a+HeNtUwZHP7nxvfvma1kJHWR//RdkEkBXez 93xqUTKs5kepiDwKbQyEjhWBF2jApqcIrpleqUtk55oxlOtMzlLkjUSQSN2Ox9f6UPOI 4KWojA13LrzmrxYkL4c5cAhjOOuvUDy+pRyABj31h9LZEMk4OVaPyAFuSfxJ4gAJmIx2 AmlYLL+CgNeZlxmvtASBVzHE8ryuZOk/UtXYEt75V2Rf/w43r3g9OLhII7AisbBV5J5h yQKg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnpMf1AWvXoZ7hDqTXMQBlJN2p5R/qOpRRyjuwkLy1A3Sy7yPOCexl8GVNaUqoDuvdn+kWJXX9+oL0s1c72UhkQJccfZxQUmTA2viJ+PnpzoYbvSe8PBMleLjYetsuCk6+ShqYJVz7pmH10X5mBgYUoUH6abWYeUK9OOhQMboeNdMQ9PBXNWsiFtUSp7BhlIlPlHZUG
X-Received: by 10.43.172.4 with SMTP id nw4mr510237icc.25.1381227803946; Tue, 08 Oct 2013 03:23:23 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.64.86.106 with HTTP; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 03:23:03 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F453D7C8042@nkgeml506-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <CAM+vMERjaGMNSmkXEHpnQT=pttcVaMABkX6q+RX=PQT-gq8QOA@mail.gmail.com> <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F453D7C7F1B@nkgeml506-mbx.china.huawei.com> <CAKD1Yr1W4KjDXc=ibKxV=MBgMiAtwuUP8rf7=MDT17R7Y2JySw@mail.gmail.com> <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F453D7C8042@nkgeml506-mbx.china.huawei.com>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2013 19:23:03 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKD1Yr3jN0rD3Gu1yHCqERePDAZt7OqMxpBpokQnuXs4jXGaXA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Liubing (Leo)" <leo.liubing@huawei.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c2fe3c9bd08304e8382850"
Cc: v6ops <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] new version is available: draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-03.txt
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, 08 Oct 2013 10:23:25 -0000

On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Liubing (Leo) <leo.liubing@huawei.com>wrote:

>  > The logical conclusion is to say that ULA addresses are not
> recommended for use on a NAT64-CGN, because they will never be used.****
>
> ** **
>
> [Bing]IMHO, it goes too far to say “ULA addresses are not recommended for
> use on a NAT64-CGN”. If the admins deploy site-specific addr-select policy
> tables, it is OK to use ULA. I think it is enough to just make a caution
> for the authors that ULA prefix would be invalid under default policy.
>

But for that to work, the operator needs to control both the CGN and all
the devices, right? Then say it's not recommended unless the operator
controls both the CGN and all the devices.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email