IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] The need for local-ipv4 socket transition solutions -- NAT64/DNS64 remains insufficient

Xing Li <xing@cernet.edu.cn> Fri, 27 March 2015 05:17 UTC

Return-Path: <xing@cernet.edu.cn>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B6071A8FD2 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 22:17:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 eKsR-K_ymKIA for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 22:17:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cernet.edu.cn (cernet.edu.cn [202.112.39.2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3957D1A005F for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 22:17:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [31.133.138.159]) by centos (Coremail) with SMTP id AQAAf3AbtwZX5hRVFRIpAA--.553S5; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 13:10:52 +0800 (CST)
Message-ID: <5514E437.9080500@cernet.edu.cn>
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 13:01:43 +0800
From: Xing Li <xing@cernet.edu.cn>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
References: <CAD6AjGT-hG-uvRQvRosrZtfrf0Nb8ne9jy=tD9oh=5zNM42Xsg@mail.gmail.com> <20150320134204.32af9c67@echo.ms.redpill-linpro.com> <A0BB7AD89EA705449C486BDB5FDCBC7B28518DD8@OPE10MB06.tp.gk.corp.tepenet> <550F1F1F.3060703@cernet.edu.cn> <CAD6AjGSxk-Hrf_NBOjpV-jvraG+xSA4p1j-AO+FQFcVGzuf1Lg@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr3ywVy_00GYuw4Eq6cW_ZeL16bxpquaWWDMgSz44LagAg@mail.gmail.com> <CAD6AjGS-QMi+3oVGWDxnSMhEJH=VymwcF=PwKLdwFRxwHpp_-Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr3Fhnx3XaXouK57gupGOzodKGb0quhQxaf76NjWxSp3WA@mail.gmail.com> <CADhXe51MUB-czeCtpc63E0cHPpb_39Vv0o2Y57EVU2w_makP5Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAD6AjGTcKgK8W+VB1H5EQpHaYiKVYXqOz_2RS-w_CiTf9kL2CQ@mail.gmail.com> <CADhXe530+OVZrFZVaYh1-zoRDvJhUd0rf4sx6a2nO8SvKmm6zg@mail.gmail.com> <CAPi140PQ+TF0rED_bQPeS=Fj415qt0-zE2RdGnEL34PAzHyx6Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAD6AjGTjXAeMF6pw5MO2Jrf9B8LJ48D3m1YTVkdBe=_OHjtroQ@mail.gmail.com> <CADhXe51TCqU2eMP4LS3DooZxQDAPD95OVJDXbiU7qvuvKCMq+w@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr2=zc57+pOA9TFs+0azw0ZR1g67+08T=9eZPHjGXBvgFQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr2=zc57+pOA9TFs+0azw0ZR1g67+08T=9eZPHjGXBvgFQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-CM-TRANSID: AQAAf3AbtwZX5hRVFRIpAA--.553S5
X-Coremail-Antispam: 1UD129KBjvdXoWrKF4ruw47XFWkAw4DGF15urg_yoWkXwb_uF y0kFs3Xr4UZrZxKr4qyrn0yryfJr1jgr1UJFyDtr47ur17ZF1DJr4DAFW7ZF1rWa4UJr1D Grn5Gr4jyFW7AjkaLaAFLSUrUUUUUb8apTn2vfkv8UJUUUU8Yxn0WfASr-VFAUDa7-sFnT 9fnUUIcSsGvfJTRUUUb8xYjsxI4VWxJwAYFVCjjxCrM7AC8VAFwI0_Gr0_Xr1l1xkIjI8I 6I8E6xAIw20EY4v20xvaj40_Wr0E3s1l1IIY67AEw4v_Jr0_Jr4l8cAvFVAK0II2c7xJM2 8EF7xvwVC0I7IYx2IY67AKxVWUCVW8JwA2z4x0Y4vE2Ix0cI8IcVCY1x0267AKxVW8JVWx JwA2z4x0Y4vEx4A2jsIE14v26r4UJVWxJr1l84ACjcxK6I8E87Iv6xkF7I0E14v26r4UJV WxJr1le2I262IYc4CY6c8Ij28IcVAaY2xG8wAqx4xG64xvF2IEw4CE5I8CrVC2j2WlYx0E 2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Jr0_Jr4lYx0Ex4A2jsIE14v26r1j6r4UMcvjeVCFs4IE7xkEbVWUJV W8JwACjcxG0xvEwIxGrwCF04k20xvY0x0EwIxGrwC20s026c02F40E14v26r1j6r18MI8I 3I0E7480Y4vE14v26r106r1rMI8E67AF67kF1VAFwI0_Jrv_JF1lIxkGc2Ij64vIr41lIx AIcVC0I7IYx2IY67AKxVWUJVWUCwCI42IY6xIIjxv20xvEc7CjxVAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1lIxAI cVCF04k26cxKx2IYs7xG6rWUJVWrZr1UMIIF0xvEx4A2jsIE14v26r1j6r4UMIIF0xvEx4 A2jsIEc7CjxVAFwI0_Gr0_Gr1UYxBIdaVFxhVjvjDU0xZFpf9x07j189NUUUUU=
X-CM-SenderInfo: p0lqwqxfhu0vvwohv3gofq/
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/uDdciCu7nnkZwH83y_bwRh7Fnwc>
Cc: IPv6 Ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] The need for local-ipv4 socket transition solutions -- NAT64/DNS64 remains insufficient
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 05:17:04 -0000

Lorenzo Colitti 写道:
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 11:29 AM, James Woodyatt <jhw@nestlabs.com 
> <mailto:jhw@nestlabs.com>> wrote:
>
>     Yes, I recognize that entirely shifting the burden of supporting
>     IPv4 onto the operating system developers, into the unforeseeable
>     future, while the network operators get a clean transition to
>     IPv6-only, can seem like a "solution" from certain bell-shaped
>     perspectives, but there is still a world outside that perspective
>     where some of us are trying to make a living.
>
>
> As someone who does maintain a 464xlat implementation for the purposes 
> of supporting IPv4, I don't think it's an unreasonable burden.
>
> It's true that if we have compatibility solutions in place, we might 
> never completely get rid of IPv4 until all IPv4-only apps are 
> obsolete. But if the cost of maintaining such solutions is low, what's 
> the harm?

+1 xing

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email