That’s why at the time being, I’m insisting in looking into the real world:
The real world expects that we have dual stack (private IPv4 + GUA IPv6) in the
LANs.
What we need to make sure is that the “access” being IPv6 only, as many ISPs
runout of IPv4, is workable by means of a translation in the first hop router
(what it will be the CE/CPE in a residential, or SOHO router in an SME, etc.).
Regards,
Jordi
-----Mensaje original-----
De: <ynir(_dot_)ietf(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
Responder a: <ynir(_dot_)ietf(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
Fecha: jueves, 17 de noviembre de 2016, 10:24
Para: Ted Lemon <mellon(_at_)fugue(_dot_)com>, Randy Bush
<randy(_at_)psg(_dot_)com>
CC: IETF discussion list <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>, Jordi Palet Martinez
<jordi(_dot_)palet(_at_)consulintel(_dot_)es>
Asunto: RE: IETF network incremental plan
Interestingly, Windows 10 mobile refuses to join the networks that have no
v4 (v6only and nat64). It is interesting because it does use the IPv6 address
in ‘ietf’.
But the top consideration is to get work done.
Yoav
Sent from my Windows 10 phone
From: Ted Lemon <mailto:mellon(_at_)fugue(_dot_)com>
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 9:33
To: Randy Bush <mailto:randy(_at_)psg(_dot_)com>
Cc: IETF discussion list <mailto:ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>; Jordi Palet
Martinez <mailto:jordi(_dot_)palet(_at_)consulintel(_dot_)es>
Subject: Re: IETF network incremental plan
At present android apps running on chromebooks do not work over nat64.
I believe one of our colleagues at Google has filed a bug report on
this, so hopefully it will no longer be an issue in Chicago.
OpenVPN works with nat64, but requires special configuration file
hacking in some cases.
I have no other issues with it. If it weren't for the fact that my
xmpp app is an Android app, I would be using ietf-nat64 exclusively.
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 9:16 AM, Randy Bush <randy(_at_)psg(_dot_)com>
wrote:
> last evening i was carrying a question from the noc team but my position
> in the mic queue was preempted by more important people.
>
> but essentially, before we make tactical decisions we would like to know
> what the purpose and goal of the meeting network is.
>
> o folk just want to get work done, and the net should bloody well work
>
> o i want to forward test internet futures: ipv6, auth methods, crypto,
> ...
>
> o i have my own stuff i want to test (which may need inbound sessions)
>
> o network? what network?
>
> in the nat64 case, are we trying to validate the well-known lists of
> what does not work over nat64, spotify, many vpns, ...? if it is
> because we think we can modify nat64 to ameliorate the problems, this
> would be brilliant.
>
> if we know what the goals are, we should be able to meet them. so far,
> the assumption is that
>
> o the primary goal of the meeting netowrk is for attendees to get work
> done
>
> o nats breaking applications and inbound connections would be
> considered as breakage
>
> o we do want to support occasional experiments, both non-disruptive
> and visible (remember the v6-only plenary?)
>
> o but basically, i just want my mtv
>
> randy, not speaking for anyone else
>
**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company
This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the
individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that
any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
information, including attached files, is prohibited.