IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Vicious circle [ULA precedence [Thoughts about wider operational input]]

Gert Doering <gert@space.net> Fri, 29 April 2022 07:22 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 DDF5DC13A8D0 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Apr 2022 00:22:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=space.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZJSL2tM76NYR for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Apr 2022 00:22:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gatekeeper1-relay.space.net (gatekeeper1-relay.space.net [IPv6:2001:608:3:85::38]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B962CC157B5B for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Apr 2022 00:22:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=space.net; i=@space.net; q=dns/txt; s=esa; t=1651216972; x=1682752972; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=7JVYGnuL+jvPiJl+Dy9tVC8Ud4KVov/Keg+jRkWspG4=; b=hwb7BiAzUQDQo+cDWozRJz6pOHpykZ9UxZua2mgDYapT7xD7HxsJ07qU a9z5iqgIVSV+dCEpmIvSeAo9EcKB150/Me1Ky9OAoaPAYb3qBLyQTATzo temWX5mj5zfe0Cse7+pyDpqJcxjuB12MRzuNqNc34ReprIOKsSLji6EX4 FvbnD8/T7dlZ6LYh0b8Z0QRwp83HVvi9Ukpo7yO1tY05R5py+M2k6tQXa 8IJA9TPc7wukUnLpylONGlRFmETUSonTk3jR3PPytXp64tyOKYwbfALD4 ubsmj4jfyjrmxrS+zRZaeFegordppdL9DPsLnUwMwvme5W9xpWB6OjQrg w==;
X-SpaceNet-SBRS: None
Received: from mobil.space.net ([195.30.115.67]) by gatekeeper1-relay.space.net with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Apr 2022 09:22:48 +0200
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietf.org
Received: from mobil.space.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E16DE40EB2 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Apr 2022 09:22:47 +0200 (CEST)
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
Received: from moebius4.space.net (moebius4.space.net [IPv6:2001:608:2:2::251]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB77E406DD; Fri, 29 Apr 2022 09:22:47 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by moebius4.space.net (Postfix, from userid 1007) id C5A82113329; Fri, 29 Apr 2022 09:22:47 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 09:22:47 +0200
From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
To: Kevin Myers <kevin.myers@iparchitechs.com>
Cc: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet=40consulintel.es@dmarc.ietf.org>, 6man list <ipv6@ietf.org>, v6ops list <v6ops@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <YmuSRzx6Ji0H700q@Space.Net>
References: <CAN-Dau2FS99ewfgH8xk-jSJFCnO92CJV9ZC98DUE2UDR7V1Eww@mail.gmail.com> <CANMZLAYbpZBDA8uFnJqfWfWTQ4S9RN4a-DqWe36qzfAfDtXiQA@mail.gmail.com> <CAN-Dau0BjRR2_7xz38DpJsz0Y=Z_8bV5n-=Eh1QUVEDzqVxmaA@mail.gmail.com> <CAPt1N1=H=eAyRu0JcHnLpZEUizDZ4Kj0VwPu=0nM=Wn+y3Ho1w@mail.gmail.com> <CAM5+tA_4rtSkgEuRUFZ2LYr6i8a7vWeKODYieVARF3RbRvgRww@mail.gmail.com> <BN8PR07MB7076DE3E745CB916FB81879595FA9@BN8PR07MB7076.namprd07.prod.outlook.com> <ADAE42CE-448F-42F5-89BE-692F493E2DC8@consulintel.es> <CAM5+tA_ksJ+agY1tze1-zPHLsgYFgjEYtnuPs+ffZbnRqiHytw@mail.gmail.com> <BAD082DA-0958-4926-B3E5-4E4599A75078@consulintel.es> <BN8PR07MB7076564E50C0DAFBFAB950FD95FA9@BN8PR07MB7076.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <BN8PR07MB7076564E50C0DAFBFAB950FD95FA9@BN8PR07MB7076.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/_cc6dJunEm1215-dV4W2Tl1xMbQ>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Vicious circle [ULA precedence [Thoughts about wider operational input]]
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34
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: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 07:22:57 -0000

Hi,

On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 10:13:52PM +0000, Kevin Myers wrote:
> To bring this back around to Nick???s point of operational
> challenges with ULA and leaving NAT 66 aside for a moment, if
> enterprises want to begin testing networks and applications for
> IPv6 and can???t deploy GUA due to compliance standards, then ULA
> is the only current option and there are significant problems in
> using it as outlined in section 3 of draft-buraglio-v6ops-ula ???
> especially when ULA and IPv4 are dual stacked.

I'm not actually seeing any reason why an enterprise couldn't deploy
non-routed GUAs behind a NPT66 (or even NAPT66) gateway if they so choose.

And the PCI stuff could be packed behind a proxy, using ULAs inside 
(or just IPv4 RFC1918), and "no routed connectivity to anything".


What I see when talking to Enterprises is "IPv6 would be beneficial,
because it means that *inside* the network, we do not need any NATs
anymore, to translate between multiple users of the very same RFC1918
subnet" (because RFC1918 just has not enough addresses for really large
enterprises, especially with many acquired daughter companies, zillions
of k8s clusters, etc)

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

SpaceNet AG                      Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14        Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444         USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email