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

[Mark Smith <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 at 07:37, Xipengxiao
<xipengxiao=[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Hi Jen,
>
> Thank you for bringing this useful piece of information to light.  I hope more people see it:
>
> > PCR DSS 4.0 (published in March 2022) does not mandate NAT for IPv6. The text has been updated.
>
> That said, I very much agree with Kevin Meyer: "If you want more Enterprises participating in the IETF discussions and improving IPv6 uptake, start thinking about meeting them where they are. And to be crystal clear - NAT is where they are and where they will be for quite a while".
>
> My point is, given PCI DSS 4.0 (what Jen wrote as PCR DSS 4.0), we should tell enterprises they no longer need NAT. But if some enterprises still insist, respect their decision.

Ignore them. IPv6 doesn't solve any problem they have, and adding NAT
to IPv6 still won't solve any problem they have, because IPv6 still
won't solve a problem they have.


Earth moving equipment manufacturer: "We think you should buy an earth
moving front end loader from us. They're great!"

An Enterprise: "We don't need an earth moving front end loader, we're
an accountancy firm. It doesn't solve any problems we have."

Earth moving equipment manufacturer: "What if we add a backhoe to it?"

An Enterprise: "We're still an accountancy firm, we still won't need
it. We don't need to move dirt or dig holes. It still doesn't solve
any problem we have."

Earth moving equipment manufacturer: "Oh, come on! You really should
buy one! We love our front end loaders. Everybody needs one. What if
we paint it green too?"

An Enterprise: "Nope. Even though our corporate colours are green,
we're still an accountancy firm and we still won't need it. We've got
better things to spend $100K on."


Even government mandates to get enterprises to adopt a networking
protocol don't work - the Internet is supposed to be running CLNS by
now as mandated by governments around the world. (I expect Vint Cerf
was being nice while working on this rather than truly believing OSI
would take over.)

Explaining the Role of GOSIP
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1169.html


 It's more important to get enterprises to use IPv6 ASAP, than to
insist that they use the "right" IPv6 solution.
>

Why is it important to get enterprises to use IPv6 ASAP?


Regards,
Mark.


> XiPeng
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: v6ops <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Jen Linkova
> Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2022 12:53 PM
> To: Simon <[e-mail]>
> Cc: 6man list <[e-mail]>; v6ops list <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: [v6ops] Vicious circle [ULA precedence [Thoughts about wider operational input]]
>
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 11:15 AM Simon <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > The IPv6 community needs to engage with this other regulatory community to get them to bring their standard into the 21st century.
> >
> > As long as the PCI standard effectively mandates IPv4 & NAPT then it’s going to be an uphill struggle.
>
> See my email I sent yesterday. PCR DSS 4.0 (published in March 2022) does not mandate NAT for IPv6. The text has been updated.
>
> --
> SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> [e-mail]
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------