Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations - work or abandon?

[joel jaeggli <[e-mail]>]

On 11/3/15 1:02 AM, Liubing (Leo) wrote:
> And pardon for my iteration again: this draft is NOT making any
> formal recommendations, but some considerations to refer if you're
> going to use ULAs.

Were it completely neutral with respect to advice there would be little
reason for it to exist.

The sense that I got from the last time this was discussed, and perhaps
this call is there may not be stomach to take this forward as the
product of the working group.

> Best regards, Bing
> 
> -----Original Message----- From: Liubing (Leo) Sent: Tuesday,
> November 03, 2015 12:51 AM To: 'Alexandre Petrescu'; [e-mail] 
> Subject: RE: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations -
> work or abandon?
> 
> Hi Dear Alex and all,
> 
> Speaking as a co-author. I wasn't in the v6ops session this
> afternoon. And I'm sorry for the silence of the draft for a while,
> but I do wish to continue working on it.
> 
> There was indeed lots of controversial discussion on it, but many of
> them (even most of them) was just not directly regarding to the draft
> itself (mostly the IPv6 NAT debate). For the draft, we heard few
> negative comments, but much more positive comments that were in favor
> of advancing it. Unfortunately, we didn't get the chance to WGLC, and
> we also didn't get some essential feedback of how to improve it. So
> the draft was kind of stuck there. No doubt it should be my
> responsibility to approach it, but the WG's feedback is also very
> important/helpful for us.
> 
> And thanks for Alex' response, you're more than welcome to contribute
> on this draft. We can have some detailed discussion later to figure
> out how to make an update.
> 
> For people who are in favor of advancing this draft, I expect very
> much you could state your opinion on this. Many thanks to you all.
> 
> Best regards, Bing
> 
> 
> -----Original Message----- From: v6ops
> [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Alexandre Petrescu Sent:
> Monday, November 02, 2015 6:58 PM To: [e-mail] Subject: Re:
> [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations - work or
> abandon?
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I would like to continue working on this draft.
> 
> I am not sure what is needed to continue working on this draft?  Is
> it ready to go as is?
> 
> The ULAs I consider are (1) in the core of enterprise PA+ULA network
> slowly migrating to IPv6 and (2) in vehicles at manufacturing time.
> 
> In an enterprise network, I wonder whether ULAs coexist well with
> IPv4 on a same VLAN, or must they be each on its own VLAN?  Such as
> to leave IPv4 continue exist well.  I think a recommendation on this
> is very valuable, at least to me.
> 
> Also, I wonder whether simply adding ULAs on interfaces of a
> well-known router means that it will automatically turn on NAT66? (or
> not?)   Will the packets addressed to them from a PA-part of the
> enterprise network be dropped by default?
> 
> More generally - what is the precise knob which blocks ULA-addressed
> packets from leaking to the Internet?  Is this a matter of a routing
> protocol knob, like e.g. BGP having a definition of an area around
> ULAs? Or is it a matter of on/off knob which allows/disallows
> reaching a ULA in the network attached to a particular interface?  Or
> does it only depend of a trivial static route being present or absent
> in the forward information base?
> 
> For ULAs in a vehicle, it is a bit early to describe the problems and
> the needed advice, but I speculate there will be a need for this.  We
> have several drafts and implementations on this topic.
> 
> Alex
> 
> Le 02/11/2015 18:17, Howard, Lee a écrit :
>> This document hasn¹t had any revisions or discussion in a while. Is
>>  there anyone interested in working on it?
>> 
>> If we do not hear any interest, we will abandon this draft.
>> 
>> Thanks, Lee
>> 
>> 
>> ________________________________
>> 
>> This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner
>> Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential,
>> or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail
>> is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which
>> it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this
>> E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
>> distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents
>> of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be
>> unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify
>> the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any
>> copy of this E-mail and any printout.
>> 
>> _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list
>>  [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list 
> [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
> 
> _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list 
> [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>