IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-ietf-v6ops-transition-comparison-03: (with COMMENT)

Gábor LENCSE <lencse@hit.bme.hu> Mon, 09 May 2022 11:02 UTC

Return-Path: <lencse@hit.bme.hu>
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 08AE9C159A1C; Mon, 9 May 2022 04:02:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.757
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.757 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.857, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 cejO8IfTabTz; Mon, 9 May 2022 04:02:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frogstar.hit.bme.hu (frogstar.hit.bme.hu [IPv6:2001:738:2001:4020::2c]) (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 CCA9DC159824; Mon, 9 May 2022 04:02:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.123.13] (szefw.sze.hu [193.224.128.20]) (authenticated bits=0) by frogstar.hit.bme.hu (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 249B2C2M046510 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 9 May 2022 13:02:17 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from lencse@hit.bme.hu)
X-Authentication-Warning: frogstar.hit.bme.hu: Host szefw.sze.hu [193.224.128.20] claimed to be [192.168.123.13]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------ws0H01XIQolMldgsLlSCGRZy"
Message-ID: <3850629c-f4b9-d578-1edf-e3d7683c5db4@hit.bme.hu>
Date: Mon, 09 May 2022 13:02:08 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-v6ops-transition-comparison@ietf.org, v6ops-chairs@ietf.org, v6ops@ietf.org, rbonica@juniper.net
References: <165054930574.9400.16717401979063970306@ietfa.amsl.com> <e8c7b506-9b53-5601-1ddf-6980d73be7b0@hit.bme.hu> <CAM4esxTqf3CW2==ruqRTW28vZdYXRxz5e+JA+ABBW-16Oc8G5A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gábor LENCSE <lencse@hit.bme.hu>
In-Reply-To: <CAM4esxTqf3CW2==ruqRTW28vZdYXRxz5e+JA+ABBW-16Oc8G5A@mail.gmail.com>
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.103.2 at frogstar.hit.bme.hu
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Received-SPF: pass (frogstar.hit.bme.hu: authenticated connection) receiver=frogstar.hit.bme.hu; client-ip=193.224.128.20; helo=[192.168.123.13]; envelope-from=lencse@hit.bme.hu; x-software=spfmilter 2.001 http://www.acme.com/software/spfmilter/ with libspf2-1.2.10;
X-DCC--Metrics: frogstar.hit.bme.hu; whitelist
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 152.66.248.44
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/fEt_531miY49DxfQwRXIicJLXzo>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-ietf-v6ops-transition-comparison-03: (with COMMENT)
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: Mon, 09 May 2022 11:02:28 -0000

Dear Martin,

Thank you for proposing a better text. I have updated the XML file as 
follows:

    As stateful NAT interferes with the port numbers,
    [I-D.ietf-tsvwg-natsupp] explains how NATs can handle SCTP (Stream
    Control Transmission Protocol).

Best regards,

Gábor


5/9/2022 2:16 AM keltezéssel, Martin Duke írta:
> maybe "...with the port numbers, [I-D.ietf.tsvwg-natsupp explain how 
> NATs can handle SCTP (Stream Control Transmission Protocol)."
>
> Otherwise, looks good to me.
>
> On Sat, May 7, 2022 at 5:16 AM Gábor LENCSE <lencse@hit.bme.hu> wrote:
>
>     Dear Martin Duke,
>
>     Thank you for your review and I am sorry for my slow response.
>     Please see my reply (or rather question) inline.
>
>     4/21/2022 3:55 PM keltezéssel, Martin Duke via Datatracker írta:
>>     Martin Duke has entered the following ballot position for
>>     draft-ietf-v6ops-transition-comparison-03: No Objection
>>
>     [...]
>>     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>     COMMENT:
>>     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>     Thanks to Brian Trammell for the tsvart review.
>>
>>     It would be nice to at least point to draft-ietf-tsvwg-natsupp-23 to discuss
>>     the issues with SCTP and NAT.
>     I am glad to do so. However, I was not sure, which to section you
>     recommend the pointer to be added.
>
>     I have added the following paragraph to to the end of Section 3.2:
>
>         As stateful NAT interferes with the port numbers, please refer to
>         [I-D.ietf-tsvwg-natsupp] how SCTP (Stream Control Transmission
>         Protocol) NAT traversal can be handled.
>
>     Did you think of something like that?
>
>     Or could you propose a better text?
>
>     Best regards,
>
>     Gábor
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email