I have a comment about this document related to some discussions that I've had
with a number of ADs and WG chairs around the formation and charter of Sunset4
to determine what is and is not in scope for that WG.
For a while both BEHAVE and Sunset4 had this document in their milestones,
which clearly won't work. Therefore the distinction made between work to be
done in BEHAVE and SUNSET4 was that BEHAVE was to focus more generically on the
concept of NAT and the things necessary to make all flavors of it work, such
that BEHAVE outputs would equally apply to NAT444, NAT64, DSLite, etc. By
contrast, Sunset4 was supposed to focus more narrowly on IPv4-only items. The
BEHAVE chairs were represented in these discussions, and they believed that
this document was in keeping with this distinction.
In the document's introduction, for example, that generic nature is implied:
"It is not an IETF endorsement
of CGN or a real specification for CGN, but rather just a minimal set
of requirements that will increase the likelihood of applications
working across CGNs."
However, this document states in section 2:
"Note also that the CGN described in this document is IPv4-only.
IPv6 address translation is not considered."
I see that this is a new change to the -07 version, so I hate to rehash the
discussion, but I think that this statement should be clearer.
In reading the document, I don't believe that the intent was to limit it to
being a discussion of NAT44[4], but that could be the way that this statement
is interpreted. The distinction I might make to clarify is that since the
document is talking about behaviors that are necessary to make IPv4
address-sharing work, it's specific to the IPv4 side of what could well be a
dual-stack NAT, but it's not limited to simply NAT44[4].
I'm not advocating pulling this document back so that it can go to the "right"
working group, because I don't think that'll actually add any value to the
document and I'm not a fan of process for process's sake. My concern is really
more about content and naming- if it is truly a IPv4-only NAT (NAT44 or NAT444)
requirements doc rather than a more generic CGN requirements doc, it should be
named to reflect that. If it's meant to be a generic LSN requirements doc, the
authors should make the appropriate changes to keep it generic.
Thanks,
Wes George, at least partially wearing my Sunset4 chair hat
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-announce-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org [mailto:ietf-announce-
bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of The IESG
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 12:59 PM
To: IETF-Announce
Cc: behave(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Last Call: <draft-ietf-behave-lsn-requirements-07.txt> (Common
requirements for Carrier Grade NATs (CGNs)) to Best Current Practice
The IESG has received a request from the Behavior Engineering for
Hindrance Avoidance WG (behave) to consider the following document:
- 'Common requirements for Carrier Grade NATs (CGNs)'
<draft-ietf-behave-lsn-requirements-07.txt> as Best Current Practice
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org mailing lists by 2012-07-10. Exceptionally, comments
may
be sent to iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
Abstract
This document defines common requirements for Carrier-Grade NAT
(CGN). It updates RFC 4787.
The file can be obtained via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-behave-lsn-requirements/
IESG discussion can be tracked via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-behave-lsn-
requirements/ballot/
The following IPR Declarations may be related to this I-D:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1648/
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.