[v6ops] Re: Call for Adoption: draft-buraglio-deprecate7050

[Jen Linkova <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 7:10 PM Charles Eckel (eckelcu)
<[e-mail]> wrote:
> >> One option is to send an LS from v6ops to relevant 3GPP groups informing them of this draft and recommending they update their specs accordingly. Another option is to bring contributions to the relevant 3GPPs groups that update the relevant specs.
> >
> > Which option would you recommend? ;)
>
> I was leaning toward doing both; however, digging into this a bit more, I did not find any 3GPP specifications that reference RFC 7050 or RFC 8781. That is not to say that 3GPP deployments do not implement these mechanisms, but it is not clear to me what needs to be updated in terms of 3GPP requirements/specifications.

I'd say that 3GPP has nothing to do with RFC7050 - it's between the
endpoint and DNS64 servers: the endpoints discover the NAT64 prefix by
resolving "ipv4only.arpa.".
It would be nice if the network provides the endpoints with the NAT64
prefix by using RFC8781, but mobile networks are not doing it now. So
it's expected that 3GPP specifications do not mention RFC8781 *yet* -
and that's exactly what we'd like to change.

> >> I can help with the first,
> >
> > Thank you!
> >
> >> although I recommend waiting until an adopted working group draft exists.
> >
> > Strictly speaking RFC8781 (published by 6MAN) already says that PREF64
> > shall be preferred over RFC7050, and section 4.3.3 of
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-6mops/ states smth
> > very similar to this draft, but I guess 2 weeks are not going to
> > change anything ;)
> >
> > A question to v6ops chairs: is it going to be another call for
> > adoption, or was it enough interest expressed on the dnssop thread by
> > v6ops? It's not really clear from Tim's email..
> >
> >>
> >>> On Dec 11, 2024, at 8:27 AM, Jen Linkova <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Adding Charles, who is the IETF 3GPP liaison.
> >>>
> >>> Charles, do you think it's feasible to add RFC8781 to the 3GPP
> >>> requirements? If yes, what do we need to do?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks!
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 1:06 PM Lorenzo Colitti
> >>> <lorenzo=[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I support adoption. It's high time for RFC7050 to be deprecated.
> >>>>
> >>>> We should try to get RFC 8781 into the next revision of the 3GPP requirements, so that mobile networks vendors implement it and mobile network operators can use it. Not sure who can help with that. Do we have a 3GPP liaison function/person, and is that what it/they are supposed to help with?
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, Dec 9, 2024 at 12:15 PM Nick Buraglio <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> FYI, this document had significantly more support within v6ops. As such, we've moved the adoption call here, so please think about it as a v6ops document, and voice any support, concern, advice, or general thoughts on the adoption call here.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> nb
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> >>>>> From: Tim Wicinski <[e-mail]>
> >>>>> Date: Fri, Dec 6, 2024 at 1:32 PM
> >>>>> Subject: Re: Call for Adoption: draft-buraglio-deprecate7050
> >>>>> To: dnsop <[e-mail]>
> >>>>> Cc: dnsop-chairs <[e-mail]>, list <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> All
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The DNSOP chairs have closed the Call for Adoption on this document.  The interest in adopting this is much higher in v6ops, so we talked with the v6ops chairs and Warren, and DNSOP will  NOT adopt this work. However, since there is interest to work on this, v6ops does seem poised to adopt this.  They will make sure dnsop are kept informed.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks all.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> tim
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 11:23 AM Tim Wicinski <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> All
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> A followup on the Call For Adoption.  We realized we did not include v6ops in this call for adoption, but we are also have not heard from folks in the working group after the talk at the last IETF meeting.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Once again, this is a call for adoption for  "Deprecation of DNS64 for Discovery of IPv6 Prefix Used for IPv6 Address Synthesis"
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The draft is available here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-buraglio-deprecate7050/
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The chairs will take the silence as the group is not interested in working on this
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> thanks
> >>>>>> tim
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 11:22 AM Tim Wicinski <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> All
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> During IETF121, there seemed to be some consensus to adopt this work in DNSOP.
> >>>>>>> Here are the relevant minutes and link to the presentation from the session:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>   Deprecation of DNS64 for Discovery of IPv6 Prefix Used for IPv6 Address Synthesis
> >>>>>>>       https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/121/materials/slides-121-dnsop-sessa-deprecation-of-dns64-for-discovery-of-ipv6-prefix-used-for-ipv6-address-synthesis-00
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>       Jen Linkova: 7050 won't work in multihoming
> >>>>>>>           Would like to see this adopted
> >>>>>>>       Lorenzo Colitti: Would like to do this
> >>>>>>>           Have you asked the mobile operators why they do this?
> >>>>>>>           Maybe not realistic
> >>>>>>>           Nick: Maybe say "non-mobile environments"
> >>>>>>>       Tommy: Will not update his earlier draft, this is a better draft
> >>>>>>>       Èric: Likes this
> >>>>>>>           Nick: Not saying remove the old ones
> >>>>>>>       Lorenzo: Talk to mobile operators, maybe drop the old stuff
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This starts a Call for Adoption for draft-buraglio-deprecate7050
> >>>>>>> "Deprecation of DNS64 for Discovery of IPv6 Prefix Used for IPv6 Address Synthesis"
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The draft is available here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-buraglio-deprecate7050/
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption
> >>>>>>> by DNSOP, and send any comments to the list, clearly stating your view.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, etc.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Because of the American holiday next week, we are going to run this adoption call a little bit longer.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This call for adoption ends: December 11, 2024
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>> For DNSOP co-chairs
> >>>>>>> tim
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> v6ops mailing list -- [e-mail]
> >>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> v6ops mailing list -- [e-mail]
> >>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Cheers, Jen Linkova
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cheers, Jen Linkova
>


-- 
Cheers, Jen Linkova