----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeffrey Eric Altman" <jaltman(_at_)secure-endpoints(_dot_)com>
To: "Franck Martin" <franck(_at_)peachymango(_dot_)org>
Cc: "Brian E Carpenter" <brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>,
"IETF" <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 6:48:11 PM
Subject: Re: IPv4 outage at next IETF in Chicago
On Jan 24, 2017, at 8:05 PM, Franck Martin
<franck(_at_)peachymango(_dot_)org> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian E Carpenter"
<brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
To: "Franck Martin" <franck(_at_)peachymango(_dot_)org>, "IETF"
<ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 4:33:22 PM
Subject: Re: IPv4 outage at next IETF in Chicago
Do you have evidence of applications not running in a NAT64 environment? I'm
interested to know them.
AFS
The afs location service returns explicit IPv4 addresses for volume locations
not names to be looked up via DNS.
Very Interesting, Thanks.
1) is AFS run on IETF network?
2) if AFS is external, would NAT64 not take care of the translation? NAT44 does
packet inspection for that kind of stuff for like FTP and SIP.
3) Why IPv6 support is on the wish list? https://www.openafs.org/roadmap.html