IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Supporting IPv6-only Networks with NAT64 and DNS64 section of draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc6555bis-01

Erik Kline <ek@google.com> Thu, 29 June 2017 04:58 UTC

Return-Path: <ek@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 5A4A8127866 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 21:58:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZnXrWu1aIb8G for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 21:58:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yb0-x236.google.com (mail-yb0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c09::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6097D12704A for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 21:58:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yb0-x236.google.com with SMTP id 84so25300888ybe.0 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 21:58:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=B47PjY+M8aAlxHPJfwvULJ9vam2C42+aUknzyeSrrQU=; b=dg/zuRu4p4T3bIaIK9EXOYoQHee4liXNbyHtH3n47XW8yaztfdOzPHJLI4Wk/6KGeR o1OhSxmALlPZTBFwY/5/W+jkZgeUiVTiV2KXD2xk3HsID9n3T0xSKbkNFcrfBqaHizWt /UWo8VrlrPSvM0R0YatTJOMXN9nW2oy9mQnH3v+/IA8MhzcYONy+OVDj81iu32a/6lpw OPhHoufYUXf/6ekJD+cIDczbRUPB3jbavHchqNbDq9oZvnKvHix93yL9gIz4LxoJTrkT 0SKQ4ua1QRtk/8P+6dDuHOF21P9zhGsP/gMqeW+cn7sC/brcRYRj2gQKfDkCpkOEt8wm 1VRg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=B47PjY+M8aAlxHPJfwvULJ9vam2C42+aUknzyeSrrQU=; b=S7WmUhDdoB1AXPGfZ2x+muGx+DL5Zp2Pq5J1iz24hEqXJwFAJQFhKX15slVnKH6e9n n/DRH1iOY6RbUF65bYSFc3sKRdsADkGuUhiWRs9fZR4mJFsS7f0fhm9T/gZu8Wn4ZrUP bJ5PZQyr6s4ccWYOYGWXnNpYnXih04Gz6LUhv6BInng0heahbLuZZCj8bhS1N9DGQ9ax 5HiTjWGjEkMiO9wwK2RALWiNZHet/HI/XpOUmQlzHzfv8teIpmn6qbsKgCiAcGVO/7Gc Uw14sYLmsu5KnjbzTS+ILlPKmAwuEzByBOaXaRncKW+GhJkp9Icu3ra/RWUqD26bWf96 tbrg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOylwd5PLNMlpIOMqyN99HxWfaNq4nnh84PNzEdC0UPBBpleQ0An Vyh/PvGA1GuHGfPAb0azCvMsAqg9h7su
X-Received: by 10.37.45.5 with SMTP id t5mr10991003ybt.36.1498712308369; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 21:58:28 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.37.59.85 with HTTP; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 21:58:07 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <47F7A2D8-9516-4E25-A673-40D6293B7CE7@isc.org>
References: <149670589074.3841.10812713591494006570@ietfa.amsl.com> <C22244D7-ABF6-430B-8155-8D4C1C1382DF@apple.com> <FA0D06E7-47F9-4029-81D4-2D96BFDD5576@consulintel.es> <65F3C8F4-6533-4C15-83F9-64AFC0EFFA79@apple.com> <4AC6726C-142E-48E5-95CF-2C3AD3331441@consulintel.es> <738488839.469942.1498664001646@mail.yahoo.com> <20170628220025.4FA447CB2073@rock.dv.isc.org> <280023835.899017.1498705302254@mail.yahoo.com> <47F7A2D8-9516-4E25-A673-40D6293B7CE7@isc.org>
From: Erik Kline <ek@google.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 13:58:07 +0900
Message-ID: <CAAedzxpk_TTvT1n_NtCFp94Hdha1mHaSJDR0u3Fqx14q7-ha_w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
Cc: "stephan.lagerholm@yahoo.com" <stephan.lagerholm@yahoo.com>, IPv6 Ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha-256"; boundary="94eb2c1b2838c9450c055312265a"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/gWSND8QFqpFAAaB4UMQzCDkPQ-A>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Supporting IPv6-only Networks with NAT64 and DNS64 section of draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc6555bis-01
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 04:58:31 -0000

>
> The whole IETF seems to think that DNS64/NAT64 works well.  It
> doesn’t when you need to use the protections that DNSSEC
> provides.  It works ok if everything else is correctly configured and
> there are no active attacks on the recursive DNS servers happening.
>

When the *end client* needs to do DNSSec.  If the recursive servers
unconditionally do DNSSec on the clients' behalf for NAT64/DNS64 networks,
that seems like a reasonable operational SHOULD/MUST we can mention.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email