IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] reclassify 464XLAT as standard instead of info

Gert Doering <gert@space.net> Fri, 22 September 2017 12:21 UTC

Return-Path: <gert@space.net>
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 E80A313432A for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 05:21:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 2Z5HWrTcNsEd for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 05:21:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mobil.space.net (mobil.space.net [IPv6:2001:608:2:81::67]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A474413431E for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 05:21:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietf.org
Received: from mobil.space.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDEC64291E for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 14:21:46 +0200 (CEST)
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
Received: from moebius4.space.net (moebius4.space.net [IPv6:2001:608:2:2::251]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC44842287; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 14:21:46 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by moebius4.space.net (Postfix, from userid 1007) id D8BF717728; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 14:21:46 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 14:21:46 +0200
From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
To: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
Cc: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>, "v6ops@ietf.org WG" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20170922122146.GY45648@Space.Net>
References: <E48DDA04-C058-4992-906E-8C8BC0E102AB@consulintel.es> <1BFA3605-4B16-4331-A7BA-3BDECBCA64EC@gmail.com> <85868796-18C7-48F4-BE69-8D50A1F47EF3@jisc.ac.uk> <472CC0F7-73C2-4A21-8F96-BBC966B01B77@employees.org> <de6b9aac-a3cc-0915-77c7-9fb880c3a16a@gmail.com> <20170921223305.B72A8878E716@rock.dv.isc.org> <CAKD1Yr13ijKCB_71_2vMyGurc3-kSraLJycGxZwf121tjp8u1Q@mail.gmail.com> <20170922070719.74AA687A424E@rock.dv.isc.org> <20170922114847.GV45648@Space.Net> <369B3917-D9F3-41D4-A7BD-DAE134310004@employees.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="pfqPuNG9QX5dciZ9"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <369B3917-D9F3-41D4-A7BD-DAE134310004@employees.org>
X-NCC-RegID: de.space
User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.2 (2017-04-18)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/via06hZpl0QrfzQihrcTZb10B2M>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] reclassify 464XLAT as standard instead of info
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: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 12:21:51 -0000

Hi,

On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 02:17:55PM +0200, Ole Troan wrote:
> > On 22 Sep 2017, at 13:48, Gert Doering <gert@space.net> wrote:
> >> On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 05:07:19PM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
> >> IPv6 applications need to add code to WORKAROUND breakages caused
> >> by NAT64 the way they need add WORKAROUNDS for the NAT breakages
> >> even if they are not using NAT64 or NAT respectively.  The cancer
> >> that is NAT64 needs to be eradicated.
> > 
> > It will nicely go away if all endpoints are reachable over v6.
> 
> I think that?fs the concern. That it will not. 
> IPv6 applications will have code to accommodate for NAT64 forever. 

Yeah, but you can't have the cake and eat it.  Either we go v6-only
everywhere, or we keep running IPv4 everywhere until everybody else
is done, or we introduce v4/v6 NATs, or we add a CLAT to every single
operating system out there.

What's it gonna be, boys?

(Oh, "or we give up, roll back existing v6 deployments, and live happy
with v4 nat forever".  FAR less work, and for Joe Average User, it won't
make a difference.  Facebook and Youtube will continue to work, and
their IoT devices will keep drilling holes into firewalls to ensure that
they can be exploited no matter what)

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444           USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email