IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] IPv6 mostly for DS-Lite

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Thu, 21 March 2024 19:11 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.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 06D9EC14F6BA for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 12:11:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.105 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xM1ce8J6SwAq for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 12:11:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf1-x42e.google.com (mail-pf1-x42e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42e]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 684B7C14F6AC for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 12:11:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf1-x42e.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-6e704078860so1028121b3a.0 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 12:11:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1711048293; x=1711653093; darn=ietf.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=b9T/2mI0ysi9WccidxIypM8wDw7Mk13KudVNp6CAJ4I=; b=fU00HD7kuESbjtgBTCYo+MBbu4kO+4pSSSDBFcgGcEunVlg8UU/f7Edc2znYHfHGnj z5x1Ij3uSvESeIQmiOgS/GEQBjt+LD7zMy2iojQ0SgVj9Hi4dbb0JNk0gx0MVloxgOg2 LafqVarZ+1rM9/+ANJzhl1hUP3Z7K1q6OMyK5mbTV4eqqhJxe/FlcL+8ZuoeyL2U7K0/ 8H8cxSuQOYfdjwppg2+e2nLHLp7Xae87GvziRTP/zo2Al5fdqJwEnCGMZrxwe0Idq9ZM QVX8GQ7Qt9iP9vzOnERVVZB8aWrQN8Q7mUZod6tvSEdg6LfLBRtBkf+RVKaF4+gOeESt kVyQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1711048293; x=1711653093; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=b9T/2mI0ysi9WccidxIypM8wDw7Mk13KudVNp6CAJ4I=; b=S+w4OYdTdyUpuRn4NMDRWcne/D7b6/v0frN8STF+wkRj4OXCYcftnLjTHpWpEoLxzt uN7SnOncQ1USnfEHP0jYc7pvVOpEWmrd/qi7QYgMcVJv5bJcpL7kRLbRRzijJkcDOw3Y 2Kvibyz52SrRCw32BdMvswqqSkaKM3KfHIccF0qAjekC+OogEt/utgFhFeVuZtlnhj7e X73aa6J2HAJ85lWJYB/ZC8LspqhLK9iAgyW3IAS2ED6w0TU0ceprzWCwnbtW5OQM6u1w UGvSsZm+aaYvUnHA7A0rVy9RyYLFR2U4HUjFsuZZKrCRaZu+65XotUDbSqPZi+MtfCvs 7zPw==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCURYDkdoI4F7i3wyv6aM9HjAhICe37ht0M0f0TQfRmztdPRioES7iwdC5w3MbqR+jFgOk0RJBS1F/8OrKkYKg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxIGsJ1YgOn+lDCTlItB+E8usXts2iLUn2aELvL4s3QETBgmgLl UCy4OsYgHhM1I4q3D2cgSw027sR+OmOVYDz0THl1dPGWsjv+TmLM
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGEkfE11CujbvVWRK5MHCUDHrcsOVvujsiiiueOeAAKH7F2LJFPurR4FpnlBKZyqTmCQg/LPw==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:61c2:b0:6e7:4607:9c06 with SMTP id fw2-20020a056a0061c200b006e746079c06mr318633pfb.11.1711048293340; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 12:11:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPV6:2404:4400:541d:a600:44b7:2c2e:2bc6:8707? ([2404:4400:541d:a600:44b7:2c2e:2bc6:8707]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id fn6-20020a056a002fc600b006e554afa254sm192020pfb.38.2024.03.21.12.11.31 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 21 Mar 2024 12:11:32 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <63a002b6-e3e8-4846-a0bf-2792b04eff56@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 08:11:30 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
To: Ondřej Caletka <ondrej.caletka@gmail.com>, v6ops <v6ops@ietf.org>
References: <453A0844-6811-4F6C-BD93-B314B694AF87@isc.org> <CA+E65xSh0KEdiLDtfjc16+153Q3V_CsABdohrXHJ+cOhjd_Mow@mail.gmail.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+E65xSh0KEdiLDtfjc16+153Q3V_CsABdohrXHJ+cOhjd_Mow@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/zwDnPhwcWb4PBuCJG1qznVKzKEw>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] IPv6 mostly for DS-Lite
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 21 Mar 2024 19:11:35 -0000

On 21-Mar-24 22:53, Ondřej Caletka wrote:
> 
>     DHCPv4 option 108 is tied to 464XLAT.  DS-Lite is already has per host support defined.  DS-Lite only needs an equivalent DHCPv4 option that specifies DS-Lite is supported by the node rather than 464XLAT as is indicated by 108.
> 
> 
> I see the point here. I was about to point out that NAT64 stands out from all other transition mechanisms because it allows unmodified hosts to work on an IPv6-only network, while the rest of transition mechanisms require some sort of software running in each host to support the transition mechanism.
> 
> However, the practice shows us that running unmodified hosts on a NAT64 network is not sufficient anyway. Switching to 464XLAT with a piece of software required to run on every single host eliminates this key feature of NAT64. In that sense, 464XLAT is not in any way better or worse than DS-Lite, MAP-* or anything else.
> 
> Network operators should be able to choose different IPv4aaS mechanisms to use in IPv6-mostly networks. I think it would be nice if DHCP option 108 had a bit field with transition mechanisms supported by the network. Upon receiving the option, the client would decide whether it supports that particular transition mechanism and either stopped DHCP transaction, if the offered transition mechanism is supported, or continued further with native IPv4 otherwise.
> 
> We are probably too late to extend option 108 without interoperability issues. What could be done though would be another option with just this bitfield of supported IPv4aaS mechanisms.

Hmm. I don't think the world needs Betamax or Blu-Ray. I really think the picture is too confused and this actively damages IPv6 adoption, so please pick one, and the market seems to have picked 464XLAT.
(It wouldn't have been my preferred choice either. The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.)

    Brian

> 
> Personally, I would really like to have IPv6-mostly with MAP-* so I could get a proper public IPv4 address even when running IPv6-only :)
> 
> --
> Ondřej Caletka
> 
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email