Re: Comments on the NAT66 draft

EricLKlein@softhome.net Mon, 10 November 2008 15:54 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 621DA3A6A3F for <ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Nov 2008 07:54:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.843
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.843 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.405, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Yq-LMAvDaD8W for <ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Nov 2008 07:54:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from psg.com (psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8389B3A6A27 for <v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Nov 2008 07:54:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org>) id 1KzZ4k-000DTD-FN for v6ops-data@psg.com; Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:53:14 +0000
Received: from [66.54.152.27] (helo=jive.SoftHome.net) by psg.com with smtp (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <EricLKlein@softhome.net>) id 1KzZ4Y-000DRv-Lu for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:53:08 +0000
Received: (qmail 19857 invoked by uid 417); 10 Nov 2008 15:52:51 -0000
Received: from mambo- (HELO softhome.net) (172.16.2.15) by shunt-smtp-out-0 with SMTP; 10 Nov 2008 15:52:51 -0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (uid 417) by softhome.net with local; Mon, 10 Nov 2008 08:52:51 -0700
References: <4911B9E7.8090108@free.fr> <BB56240F3A190F469C52A57138047A03014762B5@xmb-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com> <courier.4912CE09.00003CB8@softhome.net> <BB56240F3A190F469C52A57138047A03014765AF@xmb-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com> <6BB0BB30-7AA4-4821-B9EB-4703794F3C87@muada.com> <courier.4914868B.00003F53@softhome.net> <20081108093045.GV89033@Space.Net> <courier.4915760A.00007FB9@softhome.net> <70672088D7D2CE409FB05DDD7B73D3810232327A@xmb-ams-33c.emea.cisco.com> <courier.49185034.00006837@softhome.net> <20081110151915.GN89033@Space.Net>
In-Reply-To: <20081110151915.GN89033@Space.Net>
From: EricLKlein@softhome.net
To: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
Cc: "Gunter Van de Velde (gvandeve)" <gvandeve@cisco.com>, Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>, Margaret Wasserman <mrw@lilacglade.org>, v6ops@ops.ietf.org, Behave WG <behave@ietf.org>, "Wes Beebee (wbeebee)" <wbeebee@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Comments on the NAT66 draft
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 08:52:51 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Sender: EricLKlein@softhome.net
X-Originating-IP: [62.219.175.130]
Message-ID: <courier.491858D3.000007DB@softhome.net>
Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <v6ops.ops.ietf.org>

Gert Doering writes: 

> Hi, 
> 
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 08:16:04AM -0700, EricLKlein@softhome.net wrote:
>> This makes sense to me, lets first identify the problems we want to solve 
>> and then see how to fix them rather than assigning NAT as a solution to 
>> problems that are not clearly defined.
> 
> Well, the main unsolved problem I see is 
> 
>  - (small to medium) enterprise customers that want to change their ISP 
>    without renumbering their internal network

Ok, this is a problem that needs a solution - is NAT the only solution? 

> For larger enterprises, I see "acquiring their own IPv6 address space"
> (either by means of becoming a member of their local RIR and grabbing
> a "provider" allocation, or by means of IPv6 PI space) "and using BGP"
> as the answer to that problem.

This is a solution which can be handled via the RIR policies and has no 
bearing on NAT. What is the problem this solution is aimed at? Is it the 
same renumbering as above?