From nobody Tue Aug 1 04:32:13 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietf.org Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF8021320D0; Tue, 1 Aug 2017 04:32:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: sunset4@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.58.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <150158713179.9574.7767168468574012763@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2017 04:32:11 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2017 11:32:12 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Sunsetting IPv4 WG of the IETF. Title : Gap Analysis for IPv4 Sunset Authors : Will(Shucheng) Liu Weiping Xu Cathy Zhou Tina Tsou Simon Perreault Peng Fan Rong Gu Chongfeng Xie Ying Cheng Filename : draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt Pages : 11 Date : 2017-08-01 Abstract: Sunsetting IPv4 refers to the process of turning off IPv4 definitively. It can be seen as the final phase of the transition to IPv6. This memo enumerates difficulties arising when sunsetting IPv4, and identifies the gaps requiring additional work. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Thu Aug 3 04:09:11 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D11BE131D9F for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2017 04:09:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.222 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.222 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 qEbEDw9UQUVl for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2017 04:09:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6311F132358 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2017 04:09:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO LHREML714-CAH.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id DSQ41024; Thu, 03 Aug 2017 11:09:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from DGGEML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.17.33) by LHREML714-CAH.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.37) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.301.0; Thu, 3 Aug 2017 12:09:04 +0100 Received: from DGGEML509-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.228]) by DGGEML403-HUB.china.huawei.com ([fe80::74d9:c659:fbec:21fa%31]) with mapi id 14.03.0301.000; Thu, 3 Aug 2017 19:08:58 +0800 From: "Liushucheng (Will Liu)" To: "sunset4@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt Thread-Index: AQHTCrnXASUkwsrlZkyh4tInmJI/yKJyfBBw Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2017 11:08:57 +0000 Message-ID: References: <150158713179.9574.7767168468574012763@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <150158713179.9574.7767168468574012763@ietfa.amsl.com> Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.40.19.179] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A090204.59830451.0204, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.1.228, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32 X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: f59d78471a577881bbd34dd54cb90ac9 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2017 11:09:10 -0000 Hi all, We've updated the draft according to the comments we received online and of= fline. Please take a look and let us know your thought. Thanks! Will -----Original Message----- From: sunset4 [mailto:sunset4-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of internet-draft= s@ietf.org Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2017 7:32 PM To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: sunset4@ietf.org Subject: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Sunsetting IPv4 WG of the IETF. Title : Gap Analysis for IPv4 Sunset Authors : Will(Shucheng) Liu Weiping Xu Cathy Zhou Tina Tsou Simon Perreault Peng Fan Rong Gu Chongfeng Xie Ying Cheng Filename : draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt Pages : 11 Date : 2017-08-01 Abstract: Sunsetting IPv4 refers to the process of turning off IPv4 definitively. It can be seen as the final phase of the transition to IPv6. This memo enumerates difficulties arising when sunsetting IPv4, and identifies the gaps requiring additional work. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submissio= n until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ _______________________________________________ sunset4 mailing list sunset4@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 From nobody Wed Aug 16 09:27:43 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E52F013264A for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 09:27:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.399 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8] 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 8849yisiCfkW for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 09:27:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from atl4mhob07.registeredsite.com (atl4mhob07.registeredsite.com [209.17.115.45]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B5F31320BE for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 09:27:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailpod.hostingplatform.com ([10.30.71.209]) by atl4mhob07.registeredsite.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v7GGRZDh021894 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 12:27:35 -0400 Received: (qmail 7178 invoked by uid 0); 16 Aug 2017 16:27:35 -0000 X-TCPREMOTEIP: 68.100.68.25 X-Authenticated-UID: lee@asgard.org Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.160?) (lee@asgard.org@68.100.68.25) by 0 with ESMTPA; 16 Aug 2017 16:27:35 -0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.7.2.170228 Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 12:27:28 -0400 From: Lee Howard To: "Liushucheng (Will Liu)" , "sunset4@ietf.org" Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt References: <150158713179.9574.7767168468574012763@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 16:27:42 -0000 I admit, it=E2=80=99s been a long time since I=E2=80=99ve read this draft. One capability gap we still have: there=E2=80=99s no IPv6 version of FlowSpec. There is an idr WG draft, but it hasn=E2=80=99t had a lot of discussion in recent months:=20 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6-08 Review of the gap-analysis draft: (summary at the bottom) There are 16 specific problems identified. Some solutions are proposed in Annex A; I=E2=80=99d rather see those incorporated into the text. Can problems 1-5 (indicating that IPv4 is unavailable, disabling IPv4 in the LAN) be addressed with recommendations in any, some, or all of: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6rtr-reqs-00 "Requirements for IPv6 Routers" draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-04 =E2=80=9CBasic Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge Routers" Or other drafts under discussion in v6ops now? Or do we need new IPv6 signalling (RA?) that IPv4 is unavailable (as in A.1.1 and A.1.2)? Are problems 6 & 7 (Happy Eyeballs and getaddrinfo()) addressed with draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc6555bis-03, "Happy Eyeballs Version 2: Better Connectivity Using Concurrency=E2=80=9D? =20 =20 Problems 8 and 9 are about surprises when IPv4 support is removed from the kernel. I remember reading about this several years ago; should we have a hackathon to repeat the experiment? I=E2=80=99m not very clear on the IPv4-on-demand scenario described in Section 6 (and I don=E2=80=99t understand the solution in A.4). But we should probably writ= e a guidance document on how to handle problems 10-14, don=E2=80=99t you think? Anyone want to volunteer for that? Could Problem 10 be addressed in Happy Eyeballs v2, rfc6555bis? Problem 15 (IPv4 address literals) is mitigated with most transition technologies, isn=E2=80=99t it? Not NAT64 (requiring DNS64), but 464xlat, DS-Lite= , MAP. I like the solutions proposed for Problem 16 (Router IDs): Just pick a 32-bit number and use it as the last 32 bits of the IPv6 address. If you try, you could use it in multiple prefixes on the same router, including Loopback, Link Local, and even GUAs. I=E2=80=99m not entirely sure this problem qualifies as a gap, so much as an operational consideration. Summary of proposed actions: 1. Ask authors of draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6rtr-reqs-00 and draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-04 to consider whether they can respond to problems 1-5. 2. Confirm that problems 6-7 are resolved in rfc6555bis, and ask whether problem 10 can be. 3. Hackathon removing IPv6 support from the kernel. If it=E2=80=99s an IETF Hackathon, need a Champion who is comfortable hacking the kernel. Would be great to include people from Windows, Apple, Android. 4. Write a guidance document for IPv4-on-demand, covering problems 10-14. I will do the first two things. Do people agree with the other two things? Anyone want to volunteer? Lee On 8/3/17, 7:08 AM, "sunset4 on behalf of Liushucheng (Will Liu)" wrote: >Hi all, > >We've updated the draft according to the comments we received online and >offline. Please take a look and let us know your thought. > >Thanks! > >Will > >-----Original Message----- >From: sunset4 [mailto:sunset4-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of >internet-drafts@ietf.org >Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2017 7:32 PM >To: i-d-announce@ietf.org >Cc: sunset4@ietf.org >Subject: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt > > >A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >directories. >This draft is a work item of the Sunsetting IPv4 WG of the IETF. > > Title : Gap Analysis for IPv4 Sunset > Authors : Will(Shucheng) Liu > Weiping Xu > Cathy Zhou > Tina Tsou > Simon Perreault > Peng Fan > Rong Gu > Chongfeng Xie > Ying Cheng > Filename : draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt > Pages : 11 > Date : 2017-08-01 > >Abstract: > Sunsetting IPv4 refers to the process of turning off IPv4 > definitively. It can be seen as the final phase of the transition to > IPv6. This memo enumerates difficulties arising when sunsetting > IPv4, and identifies the gaps requiring additional work. > > >The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis/ > >There are also htmlized versions available at: >https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09 >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09 > >A diff from the previous version is available at: >https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09 > > >Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of >submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at >tools.ietf.org. > >Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > >_______________________________________________ >sunset4 mailing list >sunset4@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 > >_______________________________________________ >sunset4 mailing list >sunset4@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 > From nobody Wed Aug 16 10:00:09 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12904132698 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 10:00:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=consulintel.es; domainkeys=pass (1024-bit key) header.from=jordi.palet@consulintel.es header.d=consulintel.es 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 wmt986b3xOut for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 10:00:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.consulintel.es (mail.consulintel.es [217.126.185.215]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBBE4132344 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 09:59:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=consulintel.es; s=MDaemon; t=1502902798; x=1503507598; q=dns/txt; h=DomainKey-Signature: Received:User-Agent:Date:Subject:From:To:Message-ID:Thread-Topic: References:In-Reply-To:Mime-version:Content-type: Content-transfer-encoding:Reply-To; bh=WQTA9A5vPLWkUuhyKGOpWP8Tc ZTOB56II+z0trAMVLs=; b=hiGY0aLHRC2nx6Xc0PPZwcNJqjFTSszx1ostmQghO 7olMIYVgUzEl4ulyhg3MGwwrSqcFJcUFPcrPQaTgetu0iA85p6DXkf/eN/OtawzY 4GyNjkNNDyRB8WVR8iTsl49VlJ8r3kLE92gYZOCdQfR7vE9QiDFQR3OahP17TQYn QY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=MDaemon; d=consulintel.es; c=simple; q=dns; h=from:message-id; b=aaPlc83efl8D30EaWs4QG61gMQoP4rfgrQAYwNBugHRL5MKnAIGXhr5Wbdhl TE/q05Qg7qTgesnMEcbUo3OVuMV0uBeKXDcSIygBW79AsJGxiVy9tMwl+ 9DpSt8GebT5oqiHU8BgGeWAaGK6K6LPkgn5y3hl3FN/PEO+zQa3QoY=; X-MDAV-Processed: mail.consulintel.es, Wed, 16 Aug 2017 18:59:58 +0200 X-Spam-Processed: mail.consulintel.es, Wed, 16 Aug 2017 18:59:57 +0200 Received: from [10.10.10.134] by mail.consulintel.es (MDaemon PRO v11.0.3) with ESMTP id md50005506734.msg for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 18:59:57 +0200 X-MDOP-RefID: re=0.000,fgs=0 (_st=1 _vt=0 _iwf=0) X-Authenticated-Sender: jordi.palet@consulintel.es X-HashCash: 1:20:170816:md50005506734::QkMAf5p5agu3mm06:000090ni X-Return-Path: prvs=1401d3a9dd=jordi.palet@consulintel.es X-Envelope-From: jordi.palet@consulintel.es X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: sunset4@ietf.org User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.25.0.170815 Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 18:59:53 +0200 From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ To: "sunset4@ietf.org" Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt References: <150158713179.9574.7767168468574012763@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Reply-To: jordi.palet@consulintel.es Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 17:00:07 -0000 >From my side, just responded in v6ops: I=E2=80=99m happy to review draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-04 with possible s= olutions =E2=80=A6 v6ops need to take a decision. Regarding 6&7, I actually provided text on that to the authors, and one of = my comments was in the direction of RFC6555-bis can somehow sort out those,= but the actual text is still based in RFC6555 until RFC6555-bis become an = RFC, in order to avoid =E2=80=9Cholding=E2=80=9D draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanal= ysis-09, so all depends on how fast we move with one or the other =E2=80=A6 Regards, Jordi =20 -----Mensaje original----- De: sunset4 en nombre de Lee Howard Responder a: Fecha: mi=C3=A9rcoles, 16 de agosto de 2017, 18:27 Para: "Liushucheng (Will Liu)" , "sunset4@ietf.org"= Asunto: Re: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt I admit, it=E2=80=99s been a long time since I=E2=80=99ve read this dra= ft. =20 One capability gap we still have: there=E2=80=99s no IPv6 version of Fl= owSpec. There is an idr WG draft, but it hasn=E2=80=99t had a lot of discussion= in recent months:=20 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6-08 =20 Review of the gap-analysis draft: (summary at the bottom) There are 16 specific problems identified. Some solutions are proposed = in Annex A; I=E2=80=99d rather see those incorporated into the text. =20 Can problems 1-5 (indicating that IPv4 is unavailable, disabling IPv4 i= n the LAN) be addressed with recommendations in any, some, or all of: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6rtr-reqs-00 "Requirements for IPv6 Routers" draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-04 =E2=80=9CBasic Requirements for IPv6 C= ustomer Edge Routers" =20 Or other drafts under discussion in v6ops now? Or do we need new IPv6 signalling (RA?) that IPv4 is unavailable (as in A.1.1 and A.1.2)? =20 Are problems 6 & 7 (Happy Eyeballs and getaddrinfo()) addressed with draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc6555bis-03, "Happy Eyeballs Version 2: Better Connectivity Using Concurrency=E2=80=9D? =20 =20 =20 Problems 8 and 9 are about surprises when IPv4 support is removed from = the kernel. I remember reading about this several years ago; should we have= a hackathon to repeat the experiment? =20 I=E2=80=99m not very clear on the IPv4-on-demand scenario described in = Section 6 (and I don=E2=80=99t understand the solution in A.4). But we should pro= bably write a guidance document on how to handle problems 10-14, don=E2=80=99t you = think? Anyone want to volunteer for that? Could Problem 10 be addressed in Happy Eyeballs v2, rfc6555bis? =20 Problem 15 (IPv4 address literals) is mitigated with most transition technologies, isn=E2=80=99t it? Not NAT64 (requiring DNS64), but 464xla= t, DS-Lite, MAP. =20 I like the solutions proposed for Problem 16 (Router IDs): Just pick a 32-bit number and use it as the last 32 bits of the IPv6 address. If yo= u try, you could use it in multiple prefixes on the same router, includin= g Loopback, Link Local, and even GUAs. I=E2=80=99m not entirely sure this= problem qualifies as a gap, so much as an operational consideration. =20 =20 Summary of proposed actions: 1. Ask authors of draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6rtr-reqs-00 and draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-04 to consider whether they can respond t= o problems 1-5. 2. Confirm that problems 6-7 are resolved in rfc6555bis, and ask whethe= r problem 10 can be. 3. Hackathon removing IPv6 support from the kernel. If it=E2=80=99s an = IETF Hackathon, need a Champion who is comfortable hacking the kernel. Would= be great to include people from Windows, Apple, Android. 4. Write a guidance document for IPv4-on-demand, covering problems 10-1= 4. =20 =20 I will do the first two things. Do people agree with the other two things? Anyone want to volunteer? =20 Lee =20 =20 =20 =20 On 8/3/17, 7:08 AM, "sunset4 on behalf of Liushucheng (Will Liu)" wrote: =20 >Hi all, > >We've updated the draft according to the comments we received online a= nd >offline. Please take a look and let us know your thought. > >Thanks! > >Will > >-----Original Message----- >From: sunset4 [mailto:sunset4-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of >internet-drafts@ietf.org >Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2017 7:32 PM >To: i-d-announce@ietf.org >Cc: sunset4@ietf.org >Subject: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt > > >A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >directories. >This draft is a work item of the Sunsetting IPv4 WG of the IETF. > > Title : Gap Analysis for IPv4 Sunset > Authors : Will(Shucheng) Liu > Weiping Xu > Cathy Zhou > Tina Tsou > Simon Perreault > Peng Fan > Rong Gu > Chongfeng Xie > Ying Cheng > Filename : draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt > Pages : 11 > Date : 2017-08-01 > >Abstract: > Sunsetting IPv4 refers to the process of turning off IPv4 > definitively. It can be seen as the final phase of the transition = to > IPv6. This memo enumerates difficulties arising when sunsetting > IPv4, and identifies the gaps requiring additional work. > > >The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis/ > >There are also htmlized versions available at: >https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09 >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-0= 9 > >A diff from the previous version is available at: >https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09 > > >Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of >submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at >tools.ietf.org. > >Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > >_______________________________________________ >sunset4 mailing list >sunset4@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 > >_______________________________________________ >sunset4 mailing list >sunset4@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 > =20 =20 _______________________________________________ sunset4 mailing list sunset4@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 =20 ********************************************** 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 con= fidential. 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 dis= closure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, = including attached files, is prohibited. From nobody Wed Aug 16 14:08:33 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B72041323A6 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 14:08:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=consulintel.es; domainkeys=pass (1024-bit key) header.from=jordi.palet@consulintel.es header.d=consulintel.es 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 Fh5JzkJdjpPW for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 14:08:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.consulintel.es (mail.consulintel.es [217.126.185.215]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1950132356 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 14:08:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=consulintel.es; s=MDaemon; t=1502917705; x=1503522505; q=dns/txt; h=DomainKey-Signature: Received:User-Agent:Date:Subject:From:To:Message-ID:Thread-Topic: References:In-Reply-To:Mime-version:Content-type: Content-transfer-encoding:Reply-To; bh=Vdp146IovcM1btZacqNm5QBHD E8IvJWMHJCe9ilyoYw=; b=qOThFBdsPd7aRmtbAFhgb7tW08x2DhA1EU2o0GUdk xpFEVQP1XdrstLpan1kDFDnnfKVx3m5arbL2eIlvuKJKj9NlI6alAA76RZDJHazM sckgVDn2u1cHqawIa4k8iCx+b6stThstKyhGHV2O2p+yZcryrwKC/MNMe2LJlaLz 8g= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=MDaemon; d=consulintel.es; c=simple; q=dns; h=from:message-id; b=HHMBIUJwseJEebXOioS1w3UQMbF8wGCUGiDZa9dK9DWelzv940hK8uy+ivD9 FuQw4yjihfrY1dPIzzMNemTMjJQlkmR8h0jkg5yQm+YGz23stkZb3cT5L ZARTbgxzBcnkJHGR/QBUAez6U7OLzw2EZK7fu2Fssm/xbnVmDXk2X0=; X-MDAV-Processed: mail.consulintel.es, Wed, 16 Aug 2017 23:08:25 +0200 X-Spam-Processed: mail.consulintel.es, Wed, 16 Aug 2017 23:08:24 +0200 Received: from [10.10.10.134] by mail.consulintel.es (MDaemon PRO v11.0.3) with ESMTP id md50005507444.msg for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 23:08:23 +0200 X-MDOP-RefID: re=0.000,fgs=0 (_st=1 _vt=0 _iwf=0) X-Authenticated-Sender: jordi.palet@consulintel.es X-HashCash: 1:20:170816:md50005507444::xVjiVDuo12L9XSnN:000009Kf X-Return-Path: prvs=1401d3a9dd=jordi.palet@consulintel.es X-Envelope-From: jordi.palet@consulintel.es X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: sunset4@ietf.org User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.25.0.170815 Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 23:08:20 +0200 From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ To: "sunset4@ietf.org" , Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt References: <150158713179.9574.7767168468574012763@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Reply-To: jordi.palet@consulintel.es Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 21:08:33 -0000 (copying v6ops) Forgot something here regarding: 4. Write a guidance document for IPv4-on-demand, covering problems 10-14. I think this can be done in draft-palet-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-transition-00, wh= ich I plan to review next week (in this case I believe it belongs to v6ops)= , otherwise, I will draft something else (need to identify then if v6ops, s= unset4 or some other WG). Regards, Jordi =20 -----Mensaje original----- De: sunset4 en nombre de Lee Howard Responder a: Fecha: mi=C3=A9rcoles, 16 de agosto de 2017, 18:27 Para: "Liushucheng (Will Liu)" , "sunset4@ietf.org"= Asunto: Re: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt I admit, it=E2=80=99s been a long time since I=E2=80=99ve read this dra= ft. =20 One capability gap we still have: there=E2=80=99s no IPv6 version of Fl= owSpec. There is an idr WG draft, but it hasn=E2=80=99t had a lot of discussion= in recent months:=20 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6-08 =20 Review of the gap-analysis draft: (summary at the bottom) There are 16 specific problems identified. Some solutions are proposed = in Annex A; I=E2=80=99d rather see those incorporated into the text. =20 Can problems 1-5 (indicating that IPv4 is unavailable, disabling IPv4 i= n the LAN) be addressed with recommendations in any, some, or all of: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6rtr-reqs-00 "Requirements for IPv6 Routers" draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-04 =E2=80=9CBasic Requirements for IPv6 C= ustomer Edge Routers" =20 Or other drafts under discussion in v6ops now? Or do we need new IPv6 signalling (RA?) that IPv4 is unavailable (as in A.1.1 and A.1.2)? =20 Are problems 6 & 7 (Happy Eyeballs and getaddrinfo()) addressed with draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc6555bis-03, "Happy Eyeballs Version 2: Better Connectivity Using Concurrency=E2=80=9D? =20 =20 =20 Problems 8 and 9 are about surprises when IPv4 support is removed from = the kernel. I remember reading about this several years ago; should we have= a hackathon to repeat the experiment? =20 I=E2=80=99m not very clear on the IPv4-on-demand scenario described in = Section 6 (and I don=E2=80=99t understand the solution in A.4). But we should pro= bably write a guidance document on how to handle problems 10-14, don=E2=80=99t you = think? Anyone want to volunteer for that? Could Problem 10 be addressed in Happy Eyeballs v2, rfc6555bis? =20 Problem 15 (IPv4 address literals) is mitigated with most transition technologies, isn=E2=80=99t it? Not NAT64 (requiring DNS64), but 464xla= t, DS-Lite, MAP. =20 I like the solutions proposed for Problem 16 (Router IDs): Just pick a 32-bit number and use it as the last 32 bits of the IPv6 address. If yo= u try, you could use it in multiple prefixes on the same router, includin= g Loopback, Link Local, and even GUAs. I=E2=80=99m not entirely sure this= problem qualifies as a gap, so much as an operational consideration. =20 =20 Summary of proposed actions: 1. Ask authors of draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6rtr-reqs-00 and draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-04 to consider whether they can respond t= o problems 1-5. 2. Confirm that problems 6-7 are resolved in rfc6555bis, and ask whethe= r problem 10 can be. 3. Hackathon removing IPv6 support from the kernel. If it=E2=80=99s an = IETF Hackathon, need a Champion who is comfortable hacking the kernel. Would= be great to include people from Windows, Apple, Android. 4. Write a guidance document for IPv4-on-demand, covering problems 10-1= 4. =20 =20 I will do the first two things. Do people agree with the other two things? Anyone want to volunteer? =20 Lee =20 =20 =20 =20 On 8/3/17, 7:08 AM, "sunset4 on behalf of Liushucheng (Will Liu)" wrote: =20 >Hi all, > >We've updated the draft according to the comments we received online a= nd >offline. Please take a look and let us know your thought. > >Thanks! > >Will > >-----Original Message----- >From: sunset4 [mailto:sunset4-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of >internet-drafts@ietf.org >Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2017 7:32 PM >To: i-d-announce@ietf.org >Cc: sunset4@ietf.org >Subject: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt > > >A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >directories. >This draft is a work item of the Sunsetting IPv4 WG of the IETF. > > Title : Gap Analysis for IPv4 Sunset > Authors : Will(Shucheng) Liu > Weiping Xu > Cathy Zhou > Tina Tsou > Simon Perreault > Peng Fan > Rong Gu > Chongfeng Xie > Ying Cheng > Filename : draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt > Pages : 11 > Date : 2017-08-01 > >Abstract: > Sunsetting IPv4 refers to the process of turning off IPv4 > definitively. It can be seen as the final phase of the transition = to > IPv6. This memo enumerates difficulties arising when sunsetting > IPv4, and identifies the gaps requiring additional work. > > >The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis/ > >There are also htmlized versions available at: >https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09 >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-0= 9 > >A diff from the previous version is available at: >https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09 > > >Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of >submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at >tools.ietf.org. > >Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > >_______________________________________________ >sunset4 mailing list >sunset4@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 > >_______________________________________________ >sunset4 mailing list >sunset4@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 > =20 =20 _______________________________________________ sunset4 mailing list sunset4@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 =20 ********************************************** 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 con= fidential. 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 dis= closure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, = including attached files, is prohibited. From nobody Wed Aug 16 16:29:11 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B3EB132143; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 16:29:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-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 ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GNErCt7uOJQK; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 16:29:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oi0-x22d.google.com (mail-oi0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 02FFA132335; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 16:29:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id f11so51436680oic.0; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 16:29:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=IPWajDGPZnY9uheKwsMF1u21mX8tfVR+EcCPjDnQWMY=; b=F0uXRMy3R2Xt8BzkqTETsb7u0b8ZbkdJtCYQwgCbGdY6Iz0WfVj0CSpGzBwD81KEn+ SO1S+/Qg1vhktLVc4cYRddy1mjtqX2y/Q7Og6DcerSZcFQ3RE5VvSrv1iol2ImTHM/Ut Kd4v1oZo8JBmiI4KqDCyWwA1V+mQ/LJ2u/xNvy1bo8tkOYT9fPBUe/J7ZXNu+nSTy+eO rmSDSI+dJsp9MeaFE4snPL2S9/uInRWx/r2vkt+Zhne8Hm4YF3hokZcTcbGQIGRPtB7u IpwmtWChBtGQSPHdJK6eVdSqx4A0B+OIsvk6N0mvcUJ96U6xq9JHjBFWFmu/s59bn+mB 1lqw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=IPWajDGPZnY9uheKwsMF1u21mX8tfVR+EcCPjDnQWMY=; b=NeL94FKuiYvtTCpHLlmJO3wVFhAHqjtHyu4ZZGNUkBGKdeidTlEvmj/syfpATuyVHM rczUl1ElBYG1SDOAVp15hg/d18ptnLRrp0XIfy9LcLUBjuTFz7Kn4kdOoBj4uH8OgTno GqobT726MR/eTmWWjfYg6ANV6NbzZziKBqPxlJxagatEGKMNQ5D0Jw3MZ4ibt+jBA4S0 zUfV8SGpIb4ouJEm3Xh0ok1oOKTB4oPrtQVk0GZZZNasNuzllu1AHKdVzjpYW/7MaL1A Awp36Se1h1uLLTp0Uo9PuJPNQcupIB/mjcXvZjyFfFRqAul8jzGGhwXHByeLYLwXO5/f ADVA== X-Gm-Message-State: AHYfb5g99nROc9Th1DEutVeOMMPTcJr9VLr+zgdjDb8Q94Vv8mvCxt3S WVL16iCwb8J39xKTmmU= X-Received: by 10.202.195.77 with SMTP id t74mr4533027oif.102.1502926145215; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 16:29:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2600:8802:5600:1e::1281? ([2600:8802:5600:1e::1281]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t70sm2577685oif.38.2017.08.16.16.29.03 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 16 Aug 2017 16:29:04 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.0 \(3445.1.3\)) From: Fred Baker In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 16:29:02 -0700 Cc: "sunset4@ietf.org" , v6ops@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <0E0D8D4F-A487-4572-A7D2-C77635280329@gmail.com> References: <150158713179.9574.7767168468574012763@ietfa.amsl.com> To: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.1.3) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sunset4] [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 23:29:09 -0000 Hatless... The question I would ask is whether on-demand IPv4 makes sense. To my = way of thinking, it amounts to deploying a new kind of network. We are = asking people to deploy IPv6 in their IPv4 networks, or to deploy = IPv6-only networks. That requires some portion of the money and time = they have available for such issues. Deploying an IPv4-on-demand network = is another thing competing for those same resources - it doesn't create = new resources or reduce the matters pertaining to IPv6 deployment - it = creates another demand for the same resources. I don't see the point. I suspect that the network actually routes IPv4 no matter what; what is = being handed out on demand is an IPv4 address to an edge device. Hosts = right now get IPv4 (and IPv6) addresses when they don't need them so = they can use them when they do. They would need a different mode of = operation, perhaps triggered by the resolver noticing that an = application wants to access some name and the name only has an A record. = In that mode of operation, the host only asks for (DHCP) an IPv4 address = when it needs it, and routing in the network is to the granted address = for the lifetime of the address. Do I believe we can describe and solve that? Yes. Do I think we can do = it more cheaply and simply than moving folks and their applications to = IPv6, and convince operators to change their operational practices = accordingly? Not even close. I think it is a diversion from IPv6 = deployment. > On Aug 16, 2017, at 2:08 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ = wrote: >=20 > (copying v6ops) >=20 > Forgot something here regarding: >=20 > 4. Write a guidance document for IPv4-on-demand, covering problems = 10-14. >=20 > I think this can be done in = draft-palet-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-transition-00, which I plan to review next = week (in this case I believe it belongs to v6ops), otherwise, I will = draft something else (need to identify then if v6ops, sunset4 or some = other WG). >=20 > Regards, > Jordi >=20 >=20 > -----Mensaje original----- > De: sunset4 en nombre de Lee Howard = > Responder a: > Fecha: mi=C3=A9rcoles, 16 de agosto de 2017, 18:27 > Para: "Liushucheng (Will Liu)" , = "sunset4@ietf.org" > Asunto: Re: [sunset4] I-D Action: = draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt >=20 > I admit, it=E2=80=99s been a long time since I=E2=80=99ve read this = draft. >=20 > One capability gap we still have: there=E2=80=99s no IPv6 version = of FlowSpec. > There is an idr WG draft, but it hasn=E2=80=99t had a lot of = discussion in recent > months:=20 > = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6-08 >=20 > Review of the gap-analysis draft: (summary at the bottom) > There are 16 specific problems identified. Some solutions are = proposed in > Annex A; I=E2=80=99d rather see those incorporated into the text. >=20 > Can problems 1-5 (indicating that IPv4 is unavailable, disabling = IPv4 in > the LAN) be addressed with recommendations in any, some, or all of: > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6rtr-reqs-00 "Requirements for IPv6 Routers" > draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-04 =E2=80=9CBasic Requirements for = IPv6 Customer > Edge Routers" >=20 > Or other drafts under discussion in v6ops now? > Or do we need new IPv6 signalling (RA?) that IPv4 is unavailable = (as in > A.1.1 and A.1.2)? >=20 > Are problems 6 & 7 (Happy Eyeballs and getaddrinfo()) addressed = with > draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc6555bis-03, "Happy Eyeballs Version 2: Better > Connectivity Using Concurrency=E2=80=9D? >=20 >=20 >=20 > Problems 8 and 9 are about surprises when IPv4 support is removed = from the > kernel. I remember reading about this several years ago; should we = have a > hackathon to repeat the experiment? >=20 > I=E2=80=99m not very clear on the IPv4-on-demand scenario described = in Section 6 > (and I don=E2=80=99t understand the solution in A.4). But we should = probably write > a guidance document on how to handle problems 10-14, don=E2=80=99t = you think? > Anyone want to volunteer for that? > Could Problem 10 be addressed in Happy Eyeballs v2, rfc6555bis? >=20 > Problem 15 (IPv4 address literals) is mitigated with most = transition > technologies, isn=E2=80=99t it? Not NAT64 (requiring DNS64), but = 464xlat, DS-Lite, > MAP. >=20 > I like the solutions proposed for Problem 16 (Router IDs): Just = pick a > 32-bit number and use it as the last 32 bits of the IPv6 address. = If you > try, you could use it in multiple prefixes on the same router, = including > Loopback, Link Local, and even GUAs. I=E2=80=99m not entirely sure = this problem > qualifies as a gap, so much as an operational consideration. >=20 >=20 > Summary of proposed actions: > 1. Ask authors of draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6rtr-reqs-00 and > draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-04 to consider whether they can = respond to > problems 1-5. > 2. Confirm that problems 6-7 are resolved in rfc6555bis, and ask = whether > problem 10 can be. > 3. Hackathon removing IPv6 support from the kernel. If it=E2=80=99s = an IETF > Hackathon, need a Champion who is comfortable hacking the kernel. = Would be > great to include people from Windows, Apple, Android. > 4. Write a guidance document for IPv4-on-demand, covering problems = 10-14. >=20 >=20 > I will do the first two things. > Do people agree with the other two things? Anyone want to = volunteer? >=20 > Lee >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > On 8/3/17, 7:08 AM, "sunset4 on behalf of Liushucheng (Will Liu)" > = wrote: >=20 >> Hi all, >>=20 >> We've updated the draft according to the comments we received online = and >> offline. Please take a look and let us know your thought. >>=20 >> Thanks! >>=20 >> Will >>=20 >> -----Original Message----- >> From: sunset4 [mailto:sunset4-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of >> internet-drafts@ietf.org >> Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2017 7:32 PM >> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org >> Cc: sunset4@ietf.org >> Subject: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt >>=20 >>=20 >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >> directories. >> This draft is a work item of the Sunsetting IPv4 WG of the IETF. >>=20 >> Title : Gap Analysis for IPv4 Sunset >> Authors : Will(Shucheng) Liu >> Weiping Xu >> Cathy Zhou >> Tina Tsou >> Simon Perreault >> Peng Fan >> Rong Gu >> Chongfeng Xie >> Ying Cheng >> Filename : draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt >> Pages : 11 >> Date : 2017-08-01 >>=20 >> Abstract: >> Sunsetting IPv4 refers to the process of turning off IPv4 >> definitively. It can be seen as the final phase of the transition = to >> IPv6. This memo enumerates difficulties arising when sunsetting >> IPv4, and identifies the gaps requiring additional work. >>=20 >>=20 >> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis/ >>=20 >> There are also htmlized versions available at: >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09 >> = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09 >>=20 >> A diff from the previous version is available at: >> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09 >>=20 >>=20 >> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of >> submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at >> tools.ietf.org. >>=20 >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> sunset4 mailing list >> sunset4@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> sunset4 mailing list >> sunset4@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 >>=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > sunset4 mailing list > sunset4@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > ********************************************** > IPv4 is over > Are you ready for the new Internet ? > http://www.consulintel.es > The IPv6 Company >=20 > 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. >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops From nobody Thu Aug 17 00:43:09 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AB33132719 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 00:43:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=consulintel.es; domainkeys=pass (1024-bit key) header.from=jordi.palet@consulintel.es header.d=consulintel.es 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 PgJIGqoIqBxS for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 00:42:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.consulintel.es (mail.consulintel.es [217.126.185.215]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AA8E132813 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 00:42:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=consulintel.es; s=MDaemon; t=1502955774; x=1503560574; q=dns/txt; h=DomainKey-Signature: Received:User-Agent:Date:Subject:From:To:Message-ID:Thread-Topic: References:In-Reply-To:Mime-version:Content-type: Content-transfer-encoding:Reply-To; bh=HfdV1Xx2VJr55nWTKSlzZrzyT E+9if3xgOzPkPvQmW0=; b=s3WcIv1WFnn5aE7qRcmWSVvFF9//IM6jJm7H+Nj6k TDL575ChJJmz53MWzP3VWZZlfbmuaKNrXx2GkdbbniOr19rUyj1oeG/7v3gQ1i8q 5LVzIya9yhtDAhpUq0XdwBUGx1IxDUcB1zM4N6r3yX3xvKeprgzeHtpSqtUs1aW1 Ys= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=MDaemon; d=consulintel.es; c=simple; q=dns; h=from:message-id; b=E7wr0hCQ7uK7oGs/nVBkiRt9ZdbDR6QXbI0t4+La5gb8bn1zCOYhTNcl6mVc 7lerT5GtzkfH7JfHWuKQYL528HTf3ImQBhDAGbV4lqmclyU6X5mRUmxHi tGVZUY8ql2wOi5qjmS9vATxBLkZec5MKAyT6KkbYoY2Pr62MgORu7E=; X-MDAV-Processed: mail.consulintel.es, Thu, 17 Aug 2017 09:42:54 +0200 X-Spam-Processed: mail.consulintel.es, Thu, 17 Aug 2017 09:42:52 +0200 Received: from [10.10.10.134] by mail.consulintel.es (MDaemon PRO v11.0.3) with ESMTP id md50005508814.msg for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 09:42:52 +0200 X-MDOP-RefID: re=0.000,fgs=0 (_st=1 _vt=0 _iwf=0) X-Authenticated-Sender: jordi.palet@consulintel.es X-HashCash: 1:20:170817:md50005508814::8WppXPeGxSybbEGB:00009orX X-Return-Path: prvs=140296a35d=jordi.palet@consulintel.es X-Envelope-From: jordi.palet@consulintel.es X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: sunset4@ietf.org User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.25.0.170815 Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 09:42:52 +0200 From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ To: "sunset4@ietf.org" , Message-ID: <017613CE-A9E0-4B2E-B84A-F76C8B3A4201@consulintel.es> Thread-Topic: [v6ops] [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt References: <150158713179.9574.7767168468574012763@ietfa.amsl.com> <0E0D8D4F-A487-4572-A7D2-C77635280329@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <0E0D8D4F-A487-4572-A7D2-C77635280329@gmail.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Reply-To: jordi.palet@consulintel.es Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sunset4] [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 07:43:01 -0000 My initial perspective on this, and that=E2=80=99s why I think it can be pa= rt of the 7084-transtition document, is that it only makes sense if it can = be done by means of a transition mechanism in the CE, so not requiring an e= xisting operator to deploy anything new. For example, let=E2=80=99s assume an operator has already NAT64, deployed d= uring the transition from an IPv4-only network to an IPv6-only one. They de= ployed a few NAT64 and DNS64 boxes, together with CEs that were configured = for doing 464XLAT. Now after a few years, they can probably have =E2=80=9Cless=E2=80=9D NAT64 = boxes, as there is less and less IPv4 traffic, however, new customers in th= e network (may be coming from IPv4-only operators), still require some IPv4= service. So, if the operator kept =E2=80=9Csome=E2=80=9D NAT64 boxes, they= can still offer =E2=80=9Con-demand=E2=80=9D IPv4, because the CLAT in the = CE is automatically taking care of this. I=E2=80=99m not actually sure (need to work on that), if there is =E2=80=9C= anything=E2=80=9D new to add to my existing document, or just some text to = clarify that this sort outs problems documented in draft-ietf-sunset4-gapan= alysis. Saludos, Jordi =20 -----Mensaje original----- De: Fred Baker Responder a: Fecha: jueves, 17 de agosto de 2017, 1:30 Para: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ CC: "sunset4@ietf.org" , Asunto: Re: [v6ops] [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09= .txt Hatless... =20 The question I would ask is whether on-demand IPv4 makes sense. To my w= ay of thinking, it amounts to deploying a new kind of network. We are askin= g people to deploy IPv6 in their IPv4 networks, or to deploy IPv6-only netw= orks. That requires some portion of the money and time they have available = for such issues. Deploying an IPv4-on-demand network is another thing compe= ting for those same resources - it doesn't create new resources or reduce t= he matters pertaining to IPv6 deployment - it creates another demand for th= e same resources. I don't see the point. =20 I suspect that the network actually routes IPv4 no matter what; what is= being handed out on demand is an IPv4 address to an edge device. Hosts rig= ht now get IPv4 (and IPv6) addresses when they don't need them so they can = use them when they do. They would need a different mode of operation, perha= ps triggered by the resolver noticing that an application wants to access s= ome name and the name only has an A record. In that mode of operation, the = host only asks for (DHCP) an IPv4 address when it needs it, and routing in = the network is to the granted address for the lifetime of the address. =20 Do I believe we can describe and solve that? Yes. Do I think we can do = it more cheaply and simply than moving folks and their applications to IPv6= , and convince operators to change their operational practices accordingly?= Not even close. I think it is a diversion from IPv6 deployment. =20 > On Aug 16, 2017, at 2:08 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: >=20 > (copying v6ops) >=20 > Forgot something here regarding: >=20 > 4. Write a guidance document for IPv4-on-demand, covering problems 10= -14. >=20 > I think this can be done in draft-palet-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-transition-= 00, which I plan to review next week (in this case I believe it belongs to = v6ops), otherwise, I will draft something else (need to identify then if v6= ops, sunset4 or some other WG). >=20 > Regards, > Jordi >=20 >=20 > -----Mensaje original----- > De: sunset4 en nombre de Lee Howard > Responder a: > Fecha: mi=C3=A9rcoles, 16 de agosto de 2017, 18:27 > Para: "Liushucheng (Will Liu)" , "sunset4@iet= f.org" > Asunto: Re: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.t= xt >=20 > I admit, it=E2=80=99s been a long time since I=E2=80=99ve read thi= s draft. >=20 > One capability gap we still have: there=E2=80=99s no IPv6 version = of FlowSpec. > There is an idr WG draft, but it hasn=E2=80=99t had a lot of discu= ssion in recent > months:=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6-= 08 >=20 > Review of the gap-analysis draft: (summary at the bottom) > There are 16 specific problems identified. Some solutions are prop= osed in > Annex A; I=E2=80=99d rather see those incorporated into the text. >=20 > Can problems 1-5 (indicating that IPv4 is unavailable, disabling I= Pv4 in > the LAN) be addressed with recommendations in any, some, or all of= : > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6rtr-reqs-00 "Requirements for IPv6 Routers" > draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-04 =E2=80=9CBasic Requirements for I= Pv6 Customer > Edge Routers" >=20 > Or other drafts under discussion in v6ops now? > Or do we need new IPv6 signalling (RA?) that IPv4 is unavailable (= as in > A.1.1 and A.1.2)? >=20 > Are problems 6 & 7 (Happy Eyeballs and getaddrinfo()) addressed wi= th > draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc6555bis-03, "Happy Eyeballs Version 2: Better > Connectivity Using Concurrency=E2=80=9D? >=20 >=20 >=20 > Problems 8 and 9 are about surprises when IPv4 support is removed = from the > kernel. I remember reading about this several years ago; should we= have a > hackathon to repeat the experiment? >=20 > I=E2=80=99m not very clear on the IPv4-on-demand scenario describe= d in Section 6 > (and I don=E2=80=99t understand the solution in A.4). But we shoul= d probably write > a guidance document on how to handle problems 10-14, don=E2=80=99t= you think? > Anyone want to volunteer for that? > Could Problem 10 be addressed in Happy Eyeballs v2, rfc6555bis? >=20 > Problem 15 (IPv4 address literals) is mitigated with most transiti= on > technologies, isn=E2=80=99t it? Not NAT64 (requiring DNS64), but 4= 64xlat, DS-Lite, > MAP. >=20 > I like the solutions proposed for Problem 16 (Router IDs): Just pi= ck a > 32-bit number and use it as the last 32 bits of the IPv6 address. = If you > try, you could use it in multiple prefixes on the same router, inc= luding > Loopback, Link Local, and even GUAs. I=E2=80=99m not entirely sure= this problem > qualifies as a gap, so much as an operational consideration. >=20 >=20 > Summary of proposed actions: > 1. Ask authors of draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6rtr-reqs-00 and > draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-04 to consider whether they can resp= ond to > problems 1-5. > 2. Confirm that problems 6-7 are resolved in rfc6555bis, and ask w= hether > problem 10 can be. > 3. Hackathon removing IPv6 support from the kernel. If it=E2=80=99= s an IETF > Hackathon, need a Champion who is comfortable hacking the kernel. = Would be > great to include people from Windows, Apple, Android. > 4. Write a guidance document for IPv4-on-demand, covering problems= 10-14. >=20 >=20 > I will do the first two things. > Do people agree with the other two things? Anyone want to voluntee= r? >=20 > Lee >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > On 8/3/17, 7:08 AM, "sunset4 on behalf of Liushucheng (Will Liu)" > wro= te: >=20 >> Hi all, >>=20 >> We've updated the draft according to the comments we received online= and >> offline. Please take a look and let us know your thought. >>=20 >> Thanks! >>=20 >> Will >>=20 >> -----Original Message----- >> From: sunset4 [mailto:sunset4-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of >> internet-drafts@ietf.org >> Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2017 7:32 PM >> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org >> Cc: sunset4@ietf.org >> Subject: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt >>=20 >>=20 >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >> directories. >> This draft is a work item of the Sunsetting IPv4 WG of the IETF. >>=20 >> Title : Gap Analysis for IPv4 Sunset >> Authors : Will(Shucheng) Liu >> Weiping Xu >> Cathy Zhou >> Tina Tsou >> Simon Perreault >> Peng Fan >> Rong Gu >> Chongfeng Xie >> Ying Cheng >> Filename : draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt >> Pages : 11 >> Date : 2017-08-01 >>=20 >> Abstract: >> Sunsetting IPv4 refers to the process of turning off IPv4 >> definitively. It can be seen as the final phase of the transition = to >> IPv6. This memo enumerates difficulties arising when sunsetting >> IPv4, and identifies the gaps requiring additional work. >>=20 >>=20 >> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis/ >>=20 >> There are also htmlized versions available at: >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09 >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis= -09 >>=20 >> A diff from the previous version is available at: >> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-0= 9 >>=20 >>=20 >> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of >> submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at >> tools.ietf.org. >>=20 >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> sunset4 mailing list >> sunset4@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> sunset4 mailing list >> sunset4@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 >>=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > sunset4 mailing list > sunset4@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > ********************************************** > IPv4 is over > Are you ready for the new Internet ? > http://www.consulintel.es > The IPv6 Company >=20 > This electronic message contains information which may be privileged = or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the indiv= idual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that a= ny disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this informa= tion, including attached files, is prohibited. >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops =20 =20 ********************************************** 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 con= fidential. 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 dis= closure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, = including attached files, is prohibited. From nobody Thu Aug 17 07:01:35 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC33313239E; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 07:01:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.401 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.401 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 WiKb6xgsNP5S; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 07:01:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.157.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1FF9126BFD; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 07:01:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0049462.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049462.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id v7HDt50Q041230; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 10:01:06 -0400 Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by m0049462.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2cd2w1jb6n-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 17 Aug 2017 10:01:05 -0400 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v7HE13gn019646; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 10:01:04 -0400 Received: from alpi134.aldc.att.com (alpi134.aldc.att.com [130.8.217.4]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v7HE0v5X018928 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 17 Aug 2017 10:00:59 -0400 Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAH.ITServices.sbc.com (GAALPA1MSGHUBAH.itservices.sbc.com [130.8.218.157]) by alpi134.aldc.att.com (RSA Interceptor); Thu, 17 Aug 2017 14:00:38 GMT Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.5.30]) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAH.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.218.157]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 10:00:37 -0400 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: Fred Baker , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ CC: "v6ops@ietf.org" , "sunset4@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [v6ops] [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt Thread-Index: AQHTFtPhi+wo0/l+sUG0TolNU5N+WqKH5EkAgACh8xA= Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 14:00:37 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DC00555@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <150158713179.9574.7767168468574012763@ietfa.amsl.com> <0E0D8D4F-A487-4572-A7D2-C77635280329@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <0E0D8D4F-A487-4572-A7D2-C77635280329@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.10.216.68] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-RSA-Inspected: yes X-RSA-Classifications: public X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-08-17_07:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1707230000 definitions=main-1708170231 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sunset4] [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 14:01:28 -0000 PiBUaGUgcXVlc3Rpb24gSSB3b3VsZCBhc2sgaXMgd2hldGhlciBvbi1kZW1hbmQgSVB2NCBtYWtl cyBzZW5zZS4gVG8gbXkNCj4gd2F5IG9mIHRoaW5raW5nLCBpdCBhbW91bnRzIHRvIGRlcGxveWlu ZyBhIG5ldyBraW5kIG9mIG5ldHdvcmsuIFdlIGFyZQ0KPiBhc2tpbmcgcGVvcGxlIHRvIGRlcGxv eSBJUHY2IGluIHRoZWlyIElQdjQgbmV0d29ya3MsIG9yIHRvIGRlcGxveSBJUHY2LW9ubHkNCj4g bmV0d29ya3MuIFRoYXQgcmVxdWlyZXMgc29tZSBwb3J0aW9uIG9mIHRoZSBtb25leSBhbmQgdGlt ZSB0aGV5IGhhdmUNCj4gYXZhaWxhYmxlIGZvciBzdWNoIGlzc3Vlcy4gRGVwbG95aW5nIGFuIElQ djQtb24tZGVtYW5kIG5ldHdvcmsgaXMgYW5vdGhlcg0KPiB0aGluZyBjb21wZXRpbmcgZm9yIHRo b3NlIHNhbWUgcmVzb3VyY2VzIC0gaXQgZG9lc24ndCBjcmVhdGUgbmV3IHJlc291cmNlcw0KPiBv ciByZWR1Y2UgdGhlIG1hdHRlcnMgcGVydGFpbmluZyB0byBJUHY2IGRlcGxveW1lbnQgLSBpdCBj cmVhdGVzIGFub3RoZXINCj4gZGVtYW5kIGZvciB0aGUgc2FtZSByZXNvdXJjZXMuIEkgZG9uJ3Qg c2VlIHRoZSBwb2ludC4NCj4gDQo+IEkgc3VzcGVjdCB0aGF0IHRoZSBuZXR3b3JrIGFjdHVhbGx5 IHJvdXRlcyBJUHY0IG5vIG1hdHRlciB3aGF0OyB3aGF0IGlzIGJlaW5nDQo+IGhhbmRlZCBvdXQg b24gZGVtYW5kIGlzIGFuIElQdjQgYWRkcmVzcyB0byBhbiBlZGdlIGRldmljZS4gSG9zdHMgcmln aHQgbm93DQo+IGdldCBJUHY0IChhbmQgSVB2NikgYWRkcmVzc2VzIHdoZW4gdGhleSBkb24ndCBu ZWVkIHRoZW0gc28gdGhleSBjYW4gdXNlDQo+IHRoZW0gd2hlbiB0aGV5IGRvLiBUaGV5IHdvdWxk IG5lZWQgYSBkaWZmZXJlbnQgbW9kZSBvZiBvcGVyYXRpb24sDQo+IHBlcmhhcHMgdHJpZ2dlcmVk IGJ5IHRoZSByZXNvbHZlciBub3RpY2luZyB0aGF0IGFuIGFwcGxpY2F0aW9uIHdhbnRzIHRvIGFj Y2Vzcw0KPiBzb21lIG5hbWUgYW5kIHRoZSBuYW1lIG9ubHkgaGFzIGFuIEEgcmVjb3JkLiBJbiB0 aGF0IG1vZGUgb2Ygb3BlcmF0aW9uLA0KPiB0aGUgaG9zdCBvbmx5IGFza3MgZm9yIChESENQKSBh biBJUHY0IGFkZHJlc3Mgd2hlbiBpdCBuZWVkcyBpdCwgYW5kIHJvdXRpbmcgaW4NCj4gdGhlIG5l dHdvcmsgaXMgdG8gdGhlIGdyYW50ZWQgYWRkcmVzcyBmb3IgdGhlIGxpZmV0aW1lIG9mIHRoZSBh ZGRyZXNzLg0KPiANCj4gRG8gSSBiZWxpZXZlIHdlIGNhbiBkZXNjcmliZSBhbmQgc29sdmUgdGhh dD8gWWVzLiBEbyBJIHRoaW5rIHdlIGNhbiBkbyBpdCBtb3JlDQo+IGNoZWFwbHkgYW5kIHNpbXBs eSB0aGFuIG1vdmluZyBmb2xrcyBhbmQgdGhlaXIgYXBwbGljYXRpb25zIHRvIElQdjYsIGFuZA0K PiBjb252aW5jZSBvcGVyYXRvcnMgdG8gY2hhbmdlIHRoZWlyIG9wZXJhdGlvbmFsIHByYWN0aWNl cyBhY2NvcmRpbmdseT8gTm90DQo+IGV2ZW4gY2xvc2UuIEkgdGhpbmsgaXQgaXMgYSBkaXZlcnNp b24gZnJvbSBJUHY2IGRlcGxveW1lbnQuDQoNCkkgdGhpbmsgIm9uLWRlbWFuZCBJUHY0IiB3b3Vs ZCBiZSByYXRoZXIgZWFzeSB3aXRoIFBQUG9FLiBNYW55ICh0ZWxjbykgSVNQcyBhcmUgc3RpbGwg dXNpbmcgUFBQb0UsIGFuZCB0aGVyZSdzIHN0aWxsIGEgbG90IG9mIGVxdWlwbWVudCBhbmQgcm91 dGVycyB0aGF0IHN1cHBvcnQgaXQuIFRoZSBjb3N0bGllc3QgcGFydCBvZiBQUFBvRSB3YXMgaGVs cCBkZXNrIGNhbGxzIGZvciBwZW9wbGUgd2hvIGZvcmdvdCB0aGVpciBsb2dpbi9wYXNzd29yZC4g SVNQLW1hbmFnZWQgQ0Ugcm91dGVycyAodGhhdCBkbyBQUFBvRSkgaGF2ZSBtb3N0bHkgZXZvbHZl ZCB0byBoYXZlIHRoaXMgYXV0by1jb25maWd1cmVkIGJ5IHRoZSBJU1AuIEJ1dCBub3QgcmV0YWls IENFIHJvdXRlcnMuDQoNCkluIHRoZSBlYXJseSBkYXlzIG9mIHRoZSBJbnRlcm5ldCwgYmVmb3Jl IHRoZSBuZWVkIGZvciBwZXJzaXN0ZW50IElQdjQgY29ubmVjdGl2aXR5IC0tICBieSBhcHBsaWNh dGlvbnMgdXNpbmcga2VlcC1hbGl2ZXMgb3IgYXV0b25vbW91c2x5IGFuZCBmcmVxdWVudGx5IGNo ZWNraW5nIGluIHdpdGggc29tZSBzZXJ2ZXIgLS0gd2FzIHByZXZhbGVudCwgbWFueSBJU1BzIHRo YXQgdXNlZCBQUFBvRSBzdXBwbGllZCBDRSByb3V0ZXJzIHRoYXQgdGltZWQgb3V0IHRoZSBQUFBv RSBjb25uZWN0aW9uICh1c3VhbGx5IGFmdGVyIGFib3V0IDIwIG1pbnV0ZXMgb2Ygbm8gV0FOLWJv dW5kIElQdjQgdHJhZmZpYykuIFRoZXkgYWxzbyBvdmVyLXN1YnNjcmliZWQgdGhlaXIgSVB2NCBh ZGRyZXNzIHNwYWNlLiBUaGUgZGVsYXkgaW4gZXN0YWJsaXNoaW5nIHRoZSBQUFBvRSBjb25uZWN0 aW9uIG9uLWRlbWFuZCAod2hlbiBhIFdBTi1ib3VuZCBJUHY0IHBhY2tldCBjYW1lIGZyb20gdGhl IExBTikgd2FzIHNtYWxsOyBhbmQgaW4gdGhlIGNvbnRleHQgb2Ygc3Vuc2V0dGluZyBJUHY0LCBz dWNoIGEgZGVsYXkgd291bGQgcHJvYmFibHkgYmUgcXVpdGUgYWNjZXB0YWJsZS4gQ2hhdHR5IGFw cGxpY2F0aW9ucyBwdXQgYW4gZW5kIHRvIElQdjQgYWRkcmVzcyBvdmVyLXN1YnNjcmlwdGlvbiBh bmQgUFBQb0UgY29ubmVjdGlvbnMgdGhhdCB0aW1lZCBvdXQuDQoNClNvIEkgdGhpbmsgYW4gb24t ZGVtYW5kIHNvbHV0aW9uIGFscmVhZHkgZXhpc3RzIChjb21wbGV0ZSB3aXRoIGFnaW5nIGVxdWlw bWVudCwgY29kZSwgYW5kIG9wZXJhdGlvbmFsIGtub3dsZWRnZSkuIEZvciB0aG9zZSB3aG8gd2Fu dCBpdC4NCk9mIGNvdXJzZSwgbm8gb24tZGVtYW5kIHNvbHV0aW9uIHdpbGwgd29yayBhcyBsb25n IGFzIHRoZXJlIGFyZSBzdGlsbCBhIGxvdCBvZiBJUHY0LW9ubHkgYXV0b25vbW91c2x5IGNoYXR0 eSBhcHBzLg0KRGlzY2xhaW1lcjogUGxlYXNlIGRvbid0IHRha2UgdGhpcyBlbWFpbCBhcyBhIHN0 YXRlbWVudCB0aGF0IEknbSByZWNvbW1lbmRpbmcgdGhpcywgb3IgdGhhdCBteSBlbXBsb3llciBo YXMgYW55IHN1Y2ggcGxhbnMsIG9yIHRoYXQgSSBoYXZlIGVtb3Rpb25hbCBhdHRhY2htZW50IHRv IHRoaXMgaWRlYSwgb3IgdGhhdCBJIGhhdmUgc29tZSBzb3J0IG9mIGFnZW5kYSByZWdhcmRpbmcg dGhpcy4gSSdtIHByb3ZpZGluZyB0aGlzIHB1cmVseSBhcyB0ZWNobmljYWwgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24s IGluIGNhc2UgcGVvcGxlIHdlcmVuJ3QgYXdhcmUgb2YgaXQuIA0KQmFyYmFyYQ0KDQo= From nobody Thu Aug 17 08:41:16 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA7451321C8 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 08:41:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.618 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.618 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 NoXTxpqHAnv9 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 08:41:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from atl4mhob18.registeredsite.com (atl4mhob18.registeredsite.com [209.17.115.111]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25AD11321C7 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 08:41:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailpod.hostingplatform.com ([10.30.71.211]) by atl4mhob18.registeredsite.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v7HFf9XR006066 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 11:41:09 -0400 Received: (qmail 21538 invoked by uid 0); 17 Aug 2017 15:41:09 -0000 X-TCPREMOTEIP: 68.100.68.25 X-Authenticated-UID: lee@asgard.org Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.160?) (lee@asgard.org@68.100.68.25) by 0 with ESMTPA; 17 Aug 2017 15:41:09 -0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.7.2.170228 Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 11:41:03 -0400 From: Lee Howard To: "STARK, BARBARA H" , Fred Baker , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ CC: "v6ops@ietf.org" , "sunset4@ietf.org" Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [v6ops] [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt References: <150158713179.9574.7767168468574012763@ietfa.amsl.com> <0E0D8D4F-A487-4572-A7D2-C77635280329@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DC00555@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DC00555@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sunset4] [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 15:41:15 -0000 On 8/17/17, 10:00 AM, "v6ops on behalf of STARK, BARBARA H" wrote: >> The question I would ask is whether on-demand IPv4 makes sense. > >I think "on-demand IPv4" would be rather easy with PPPoE. Many (telco) >ISPs are still using PPPoE, and there's still a lot of equipment and >routers that support it. That=E2=80=99s exactly how it reads in the gapanalysis draft: it makes sense for PPPoE. However, I will argue to both working groups that we should find an operator who thinks this is a good idea. I hope we can get them to write it up. If there is no such operator, we should remove the section (or at most, footnote it as an idea somebody once thought of). Lee From nobody Thu Aug 17 09:46:30 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E0A51321BF; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 09:46:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eqqh75s2A6Ya; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 09:46:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oi0-x233.google.com (mail-oi0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B19AD132055; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 09:46:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi0-x233.google.com with SMTP id g131so72070443oic.3; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 09:46:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=/V2d7MsnYemaiYJBcvj8gehRaLGhLMKQ9THCPOsE0Tc=; b=E+BIdHrxCHOoA0steNa+6phgsIIXzDkUcfB/N5Z9Oaan2QKPoLD6lXQs5+paoHHK4I axgt3p1YO3/GUsVbwojN0Ucl1S+39n/LDGwBUGA84FZB/IvuvQciGM5Vn0UUZrMO0DFU /H0kLmrRtcWSR+WK/mSnjbYUuyAl3iEkE/dtg0vltY6+TWTr95r2a3PIwWAf1z+GvHqh 1VsjvgIlmBLxa6JIc7eRoytg8Ka+TiJnrcFOotl0mEwsCBxGUncfvSSNUPYJJ89VSZ2d qMDm61R+xCES8GmlxO3dXcH6B4JghzzYhz0zB+MB0LTqQHeBOC66mrHwKS13Rt+zIB5L W6VQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=/V2d7MsnYemaiYJBcvj8gehRaLGhLMKQ9THCPOsE0Tc=; b=q+GNbyDvFGb83q7/lMSTFs7dRdyOS5mV7+PXKgeq932hkqZA6XjptXCHgOlv3QqqML gnjyn/kSihFqKJRy5mMYd/zhPYXACriF/C4i/3vjAbXINKiZcq8LCjfjRTQZdz003IwX +fO0e1B60FVe404RqmfJw+LaIRqvIDeMK0FivHV09nQ4/AJZ0LgdXn4z0syijysWE/wv aYmjaPm3gKkYbvyL6GSLaOnHK641boeU8Kmu+oijEF/U3QR+l+QMJdWjsOe0Kxz3VCs8 7CAkiV/vxZ9mLsKqMCDEUdvLuj3FjmeOc7OKs7WdKvU0DsFWqkmYQQQ7baz3wUHZPREg Z9Fw== X-Gm-Message-State: AHYfb5i4rdP1Ivj+5cBmamye3s5wadJE1wVaGW+mEH/dgn6QDRJtMZZ/ zeoTk461TGv11w== X-Received: by 10.202.74.68 with SMTP id x65mr7677263oia.316.1502988380169; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 09:46:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2600:8802:5600:1e::1281? ([2600:8802:5600:1e::1281]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 82sm4564290oib.57.2017.08.17.09.46.18 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 17 Aug 2017 09:46:19 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.0 \(3445.1.3\)) From: Fred Baker In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 09:46:17 -0700 Cc: "STARK, BARBARA H" , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ , "v6ops@ietf.org" , "sunset4@ietf.org" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <034F179A-7D3D-41DA-AC94-2634AD404BC0@gmail.com> References: <150158713179.9574.7767168468574012763@ietfa.amsl.com> <0E0D8D4F-A487-4572-A7D2-C77635280329@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DC00555@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> To: Lee Howard X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.1.3) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sunset4] [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 16:46:22 -0000 > On Aug 17, 2017, at 8:41 AM, Lee Howard wrote: >=20 > I will argue to both working groups that we should find an > operator who thinks this is a good idea. I hope we can get them to = write > it up. If there is no such operator, we should remove the section (or = at > most, footnote it as an idea somebody once thought of). IIRC, Terastream looked at the idea a few years ago and eventually = dropped it. They might be interested to say what their thought processes = were - pro and con.= From nobody Thu Aug 17 13:59:37 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71649131D19; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 13:59:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.601 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 5Qrup0QdpvFI; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 13:59:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5D90126B6E; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 13:59:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0049295.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049295.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id v7HKtgdD013680; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 16:59:16 -0400 Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by m0049295.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2cdj8wgwt3-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 17 Aug 2017 16:59:15 -0400 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v7HKxENV021626; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 16:59:14 -0400 Received: from alpi134.aldc.att.com (alpi134.aldc.att.com [130.8.217.4]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v7HKx9fP021600 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 17 Aug 2017 16:59:11 -0400 Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAA.ITServices.sbc.com (GAALPA1MSGHUBAA.itservices.sbc.com [130.8.218.150]) by alpi134.aldc.att.com (RSA Interceptor); Thu, 17 Aug 2017 20:58:54 GMT Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.5.30]) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAA.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.218.150]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 16:58:54 -0400 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: Lee Howard , Fred Baker , "JORDI PALET MARTINEZ" CC: "v6ops@ietf.org" , "sunset4@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [v6ops] [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt Thread-Index: AQHTFtPhi+wo0/l+sUG0TolNU5N+WqKH5EkAgACh8xCAAG2hgIAACQOA Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 20:58:54 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DC00F4F@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <150158713179.9574.7767168468574012763@ietfa.amsl.com> <0E0D8D4F-A487-4572-A7D2-C77635280329@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DC00555@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.10.216.68] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-RSA-Inspected: yes X-RSA-Classifications: public X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-08-17_12:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1707230000 definitions=main-1708170338 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sunset4] [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 20:59:29 -0000 PiA+PiBUaGUgcXVlc3Rpb24gSSB3b3VsZCBhc2sgaXMgd2hldGhlciBvbi1kZW1hbmQgSVB2NCBt YWtlcyBzZW5zZS4NCj4gPiANCj4gPkkgdGhpbmsgIm9uLWRlbWFuZCBJUHY0IiB3b3VsZCBiZSBy YXRoZXIgZWFzeSB3aXRoIFBQUG9FLiBNYW55ICh0ZWxjbykNCj4gPklTUHMgYXJlIHN0aWxsIHVz aW5nIFBQUG9FLCBhbmQgdGhlcmUncyBzdGlsbCBhIGxvdCBvZiBlcXVpcG1lbnQgYW5kDQo+ID5y b3V0ZXJzIHRoYXQgc3VwcG9ydCBpdC4NCj4gDQo+IFRoYXTigJlzIGV4YWN0bHkgaG93IGl0IHJl YWRzIGluIHRoZSBnYXBhbmFseXNpcyBkcmFmdDogaXQgbWFrZXMgc2Vuc2UgZm9yIFBQUG9FLg0K PiANCj4gSG93ZXZlciwgSSB3aWxsIGFyZ3VlIHRvIGJvdGggd29ya2luZyBncm91cHMgdGhhdCB3 ZSBzaG91bGQgZmluZCBhbiBvcGVyYXRvcg0KPiB3aG8gdGhpbmtzIHRoaXMgaXMgYSBnb29kIGlk ZWEuIEkgaG9wZSB3ZSBjYW4gZ2V0IHRoZW0gdG8gd3JpdGUgaXQgdXAuIElmIHRoZXJlDQo+IGlz IG5vIHN1Y2ggb3BlcmF0b3IsIHdlIHNob3VsZCByZW1vdmUgdGhlIHNlY3Rpb24gKG9yIGF0IG1v c3QsIGZvb3Rub3RlIGl0IGFzDQo+IGFuIGlkZWEgc29tZWJvZHkgb25jZSB0aG91Z2h0IG9mKS4N Cg0KT24tZGVtYW5kIElQdjQgaXMgdW5yZWFsaXN0aWMgaW4gdG9kYXkncyB3b3JsZC4gVG8gYmUg dXNlZnVsLCBpdCByZXF1aXJlcyBhIG1ham9yaXR5IG9mIGN1c3RvbWVycyBoYXZlIG5vIGNoYXR0 eS10by10aGUtSW50ZXJuZXQgSVB2NCBhcHBzIG9uIHRoZWlyIGhvbWUgbmV0d29yay4gVGhhdCdz IG1hbnkgeWVhcnMgYXdheSwgZ2l2ZW4gY29udGludWluZyBzYWxlcyBvZiBJUHY0LW9ubHkgIlNt YXJ0IiBUVnMgYW5kIEJsdS1yYXkgcGxheWVycy4gDQoNCkFzIGZvciBkb2N1bWVudGluZyBob3cg dG8gZG8gUFBQb0Ugb24gZGVtYW5kLCBJIGNvbnNpZGVyIHRoYXQgdW5uZWNlc3NhcnkuIEl0J3Mg YWxyZWFkeSBrbm93biBob3cgdG8gZG8gdGhhdC4gVGhlIGNvZGUsIGVxdWlwbWVudCwgYW5kIG9w ZXJhdGlvbmFsIGV4cGVydGlzZSBhbHJlYWR5IGV4aXN0cyAtLSBlc3BlY2lhbGx5IGFtb25nIElT UHMgd2l0aCBhIGhpc3Rvcnkgb2YgdXNpbmcgUFBQb0UuIEJCRiBldmVuIGhhcyBSRyByZXF1aXJl bWVudHMgZG9jdW1lbnRlZCBmb3IgaXQsIGFuZCBuZXR3b3JrIGVsZW1lbnQgYW5kIGFyY2hpdGVj dHVyZSByZXF1aXJlbWVudHMuIEkgc2VlIG5vIG5lZWQgdG8gY3JlYXRlIGFkZGl0aW9uYWwgZG9j dW1lbnRhdGlvbiBpbiBJRVRGLiBJRVRGIGhhcyBuZXZlciBiZWVuIGEgZ29vZCBwbGFjZSB0byBk b2N1bWVudCBhbnl0aGluZyBzdWJzdGFudGl2ZSByZWxhdGVkIHRvIFBQUG9FIChQUFBvRSBpcyBu b3QgYW4gSUVURiBzdGFuZGFyZDsgaXQgd2FzIHB1Ymxpc2hlZCBhcyBhbiAiaW5kZXBlbmRlbnQg c3VibWlzc2lvbiIgaW5mb3JtYXRpb25hbCBSRkMgYmVjYXVzZSBubyBJRVRGIFdHIHdvdWxkIHRv dWNoIGl0KS4NCg0KSSBkb24ndCBjYXJlIHN0cm9uZ2x5IHdoZXRoZXIgb3Igbm90IG9uLWRlbWFu ZCBJUHY0IGlzIHJlbW92ZWQgZnJvbSB0aGUgZ2FwYW5hbHlzaXMgZHJhZnQgKHdoaWNoIEkgdGhp bmsgaXMgd2hhdCBMZWUgc3VnZ2VzdGVkKS4gQnV0IEkgZG8gZmluZCBpdCBvZGQgdGhhdCBpdCBz aG91bGQgYmUgcmVtb3ZlZCBqdXN0IGJlY2F1c2UgaXQgd291bGQgb25seSBiZSB1c2VmdWwgZHVy aW5nIHRoZSBhY3R1YWwgc3Vuc2V0IG9mIElQdjQgKGFuZCBub3QgaW4gbmVhci10ZXJtIGRlcGxv eW1lbnRzKS4gVGhlIGFuYWx5c2lzIGRvZXMgbm90IGFwcGVhciB0byBiZSB3cml0dGVuIHRvIG9u bHkgZGlzY3VzcyBuZWFyLXRlcm0gcHJvYmxlbXMgdGhhdCBtaWdodCBiZSBleHBlcmllbmNlZCBh bmQgcG90ZW50aWFsIG5lYXItdGVybSBzb2x1dGlvbnMuIFRoaXMgcGFydGljdWxhciBzZWN0aW9u IGNsZWFybHkgbm90ZXMgdGhhdCBpdCBpcyBvbmx5IHJlbGV2YW50IGZvciB0aGUgdGltZSBwZXJp b2Qgd2hlbiBJUHY0IHJlYWxseSBpcyBzdW5zZXR0aW5nLiBJIGNvdWxkIGNlcnRhaW5seSBlbnZp c2lvbiB0aGlzIG1pZ2h0IGJlIHVzZWQgbWFueSB5ZWFycyBmcm9tIG5vdyB3aGVuIGN1cnJlbnQg ZHVhbCBzdGFjayBwcm92aWRlcnMgc3RhcnQgdHVybmluZyBkb3duIElQdjQuIEl0IGFsc28gc2Vl bXMgb2RkIHRvIHJlbW92ZSB0aGUgZ2FwIGFuYWx5c2lzIGp1c3QgYmVjYXVzZSBuby1vbmUgdG9k YXkgd2FudHMgdG8gZGVwbG95IGl0IHRvZGF5ICh3aGljaCwgYXMgdGhlIGFuYWx5c2lzIHNheXMs IHdvdWxkIG5vdCBiZSBhIGdvb2QgaWRlYSkgb3IgZG9jdW1lbnQgaW4gSUVURiBob3cgdG8gZG8g c29tZXRoaW5nIHRoYXQgaXMgd2VsbC1kb2N1bWVudGVkIGVsc2V3aGVyZSBhbmQgd291bGRuJ3Qg YmUgdXNlZnVsIHVudGlsIHllYXJzIGZyb20gbm93LiBUaGUgZ2FwIGFuYWx5c2lzIGRvZXMgcG9p bnQgdG8gd2hlcmUgdGhlIHNvbHV0aW9uIGlzIGN1cnJlbnRseSBkb2N1bWVudGVkLg0KQmFyYmFy YQ0K From nobody Mon Aug 21 06:29:29 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE4791329F2 for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 06:29:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.399 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8] 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 XxxCTpqxoguu for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 06:29:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from atl4mhob12.registeredsite.com (atl4mhob12.registeredsite.com [209.17.115.50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC361132A25 for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 06:29:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailpod.hostingplatform.com ([10.30.71.203]) by atl4mhob12.registeredsite.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v7LDTNS2002258 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 09:29:23 -0400 Received: (qmail 15214 invoked by uid 0); 21 Aug 2017 13:29:23 -0000 X-TCPREMOTEIP: 68.100.68.25 X-Authenticated-UID: lee@asgard.org Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.160?) (lee@asgard.org@68.100.68.25) by 0 with ESMTPA; 21 Aug 2017 13:29:22 -0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.7.2.170228 Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 09:29:18 -0400 From: Lee Howard To: "STARK, BARBARA H" , Fred Baker , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ CC: "sunset4@ietf.org" Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [sunset4] [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sunset4] [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 13:29:28 -0000 On 8/17/17, 4:58 PM, "sunset4 on behalf of STARK, BARBARA H" wrote: >> >> The question I would ask is whether on-demand IPv4 makes sense. >> >=20 >> >I think "on-demand IPv4" would be rather easy with PPPoE. Many (telco) >> >ISPs are still using PPPoE, and there's still a lot of equipment and >> >routers that support it. >>=20 >> That=E2=80=99s exactly how it reads in the gapanalysis draft: it makes sense >>for PPPoE. >>=20 >> However, I will argue to both working groups that we should find an >>operator >> who thinks this is a good idea. I hope we can get them to write it up. >>If there >> is no such operator, we should remove the section (or at most, footnote >>it as >> an idea somebody once thought of). > >On-demand IPv4 is unrealistic in today's world. To be useful, it requires >a majority of customers have no chatty-to-the-Internet IPv4 apps on their >home network. That's many years away, given continuing sales of IPv4-only >"Smart" TVs and Blu-ray players. > >As for documenting how to do PPPoE on demand, I consider that >unnecessary. It's already known how to do that. The code, equipment, and >operational expertise already exists -- especially among ISPs with a >history of using PPPoE. BBF even has RG requirements documented for it, >and network element and architecture requirements. I see no need to >create additional documentation in IETF. IETF has never been a good place >to document anything substantive related to PPPoE (PPPoE is not an IETF >standard; it was published as an "independent submission" informational >RFC because no IETF WG would touch it). > >I don't care strongly whether or not on-demand IPv4 is removed from the >gapanalysis draft (which I think is what Lee suggested). But I do find it >odd that it should be removed just because it would only be useful during >the actual sunset of IPv4 (and not in near-term deployments). I agree that the scope of sunset4-gapanalysis includes the long term. If IPv4-on-demand (or specifically the PPPoE version) were completely out of the question of ever being used, I would continue advocating for the section to be removed. But I think you=E2=80=99re saying that it will be used, bu= t that the people most likely to use it don=E2=80=99t know it yet. In that case, let=E2=80=99s leave it in. Lee From nobody Wed Aug 30 07:22:48 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C337C132055 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 07:22:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 5tWeAYx8eUMc for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 07:22:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cheri.viagenie.ca (cheri.viagenie.ca [IPv6:2620:0:230:8000::48]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 36B141321DF for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 07:22:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by cheri.viagenie.ca (Postfix, from userid 2010) id 460A5DAEB1; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 10:22:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from jazz.viagenie.ca (jazz.viagenie.ca [IPv6:2620:0:230:8000::2]) by cheri.viagenie.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BF4ADAEA0 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 10:22:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [206.123.31.198] (h198.viagenie.ca [206.123.31.198]) by jazz.viagenie.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3A6544037D for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 10:22:43 -0400 (EDT) From: "Marc Blanchet" To: sunset4@ietf.org Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 10:22:31 -0400 Message-ID: <05E636C1-1877-419E-8104-39DBBEDE307B@viagenie.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; markup=markdown X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.7r5403) Archived-At: Subject: [sunset4] Working group last call on draft-ietf-sunset4-ipv6-ietf X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 14:22:47 -0000 This is a working group last call on draft-ietf-sunset4-ipv6-ietf. Please send comments to the mailing list by sept 15th, 23h59 UTC. If you read the document and you agree but have no additional comments, please say so on the mailing list. Marc&Wes, co-chairs. From nobody Wed Aug 30 08:17:32 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B3C6132CF4 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 08:17:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=consulintel.es; domainkeys=pass (1024-bit key) header.from=jordi.palet@consulintel.es header.d=consulintel.es 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 GPMkkOa0h_XM for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 08:17:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.consulintel.es (mail.consulintel.es [217.126.185.215]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83D97132CEA for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 08:17:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=consulintel.es; s=MDaemon; t=1504106244; x=1504711044; q=dns/txt; h=DomainKey-Signature: Received:User-Agent:Date:Subject:From:To:Message-ID:Thread-Topic: References:In-Reply-To:Mime-version:Content-type: Content-transfer-encoding:Reply-To; bh=Wj6zGHd2HEQ7WfZE95/QmlTl9 E4DPnxEpsZRJm1bSSM=; b=NEXRExJhD5ZMarHnUrD3UOskNkbrCs/5DSEp851go v3yCGb02ED+NzGypRtyXwqQNtoha+NSwNdaX/4k1zjQUiEIk6gDP2s/gsatMIU2r +tWJTNwV8Ou5GT+JGpSagBoiaNo2kixXZuqtUfoaLvl8fbwJm4pQFC54oQ3WW3fA k0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=MDaemon; d=consulintel.es; c=simple; q=dns; h=from:message-id; b=qB2chcOu2V90hwc0vVJlvz4U26K7MDjEFDhqJhcXdeZm4xpE6YtWAzUv7kin xYzDfe2gAhxCpNxnwBHj/UBU0pHgCvvDIhCGE+9K1bx8n13AJNyyGmFz1 H+5NhdeuJGBP9ph4p4wejyRadloLXSD0A9eTQXEkRM5eYFnImSGwFE=; X-MDAV-Processed: mail.consulintel.es, Wed, 30 Aug 2017 17:17:24 +0200 X-Spam-Processed: mail.consulintel.es, Wed, 30 Aug 2017 17:17:24 +0200 Received: from [10.10.10.136] by mail.consulintel.es (MDaemon PRO v11.0.3) with ESMTP id md50005533027.msg for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 17:17:23 +0200 X-MDOP-RefID: re=0.000,fgs=0 (_st=1 _vt=0 _iwf=0) X-Authenticated-Sender: jordi.palet@consulintel.es X-HashCash: 1:20:170830:md50005533027::+miVKR8wtdXs5p7w:0000Cq+i X-Return-Path: prvs=1415a79caa=jordi.palet@consulintel.es X-Envelope-From: jordi.palet@consulintel.es X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: sunset4@ietf.org User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.25.0.170815 Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 17:17:18 +0200 From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ To: Message-ID: <74F03D3C-AC69-4508-A970-0E8EF6D3A873@consulintel.es> Thread-Topic: [sunset4] Working group last call on draft-ietf-sunset4-ipv6-ietf References: <05E636C1-1877-419E-8104-39DBBEDE307B@viagenie.ca> In-Reply-To: <05E636C1-1877-419E-8104-39DBBEDE307B@viagenie.ca> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Reply-To: jordi.palet@consulintel.es Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sunset4] Working group last call on draft-ietf-sunset4-ipv6-ietf X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 15:17:30 -0000 I just read the document again, and I=E2=80=99m fine in moving it forward. Regards, Jordi =20 -----Mensaje original----- De: sunset4 en nombre de Marc Blanchet Responder a: Fecha: mi=C3=A9rcoles, 30 de agosto de 2017, 16:22 Para: Asunto: [sunset4] Working group last call on draft-ietf-sunset4-ipv6-ietf This is a working group last call on draft-ietf-sunset4-ipv6-ietf.=20 Please send comments to the mailing list by sept 15th, 23h59 UTC. If yo= u=20 read the document and you agree but have no additional comments, please= =20 say so on the mailing list. =20 Marc&Wes, co-chairs. =20 _______________________________________________ sunset4 mailing list sunset4@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 =20 ********************************************** 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 con= fidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the i= ndividual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, = copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if p= artially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be cons= idered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware t= hat any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this in= formation, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibi= ted, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the origin= al sender to inform about this communication and delete it. From nobody Wed Aug 30 13:59:51 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A2D4132707 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 13:59:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.8 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=umn.edu 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 yEM_0k_Dl-DY for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 13:59:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mta-p6.oit.umn.edu (mta-p6.oit.umn.edu [134.84.196.206]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 615791321D8 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 13:59:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mta-p6.oit.umn.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id E72A6206 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 20:59:48 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at umn.edu Received: from mta-p6.oit.umn.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mta-p6.oit.umn.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SKXL01b6P_0H for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 15:59:48 -0500 (CDT) Received: from mail-vk0-f70.google.com (mail-vk0-f70.google.com [209.85.213.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mta-p6.oit.umn.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AEEED66F for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 15:59:48 -0500 (CDT) Received: by mail-vk0-f70.google.com with SMTP id w144so4277967vkw.2 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 13:59:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=umn.edu; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=h1we7iNCUZi74CUmUp3M6rmYriO7lMBBtlqf9PLFrII=; b=erF7HTCmFHmDNOUA0+B9I5bD6JPbfcC+FFaobghF2fQNgqDoLgzsrrKTZyZbJrUOuo l0cvAvff4DGgG2+MhEshr0YHVUEjtxlStN7KraNXf7pFC2r7XwEi7hMduwRKzP60h7mR zAlssu0gzq0QQ99ttkJagNjsqNOQ6aFZj+0rzxah255s/THHtUQPF24EKXJH5fK5SYui iu6b+5L1h7QbE0j/+I4Y/wrs2xzVzFOKE9WEQLWl8kR6S2pOd34BzWlaA1R47sEDgGQt DwSf5D8QsxEdvkvmWAD5AYzv/aWXv7fbt9ny5xa3gg//MLC+23InIr5njzg/DRnPZdEw rFLw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=h1we7iNCUZi74CUmUp3M6rmYriO7lMBBtlqf9PLFrII=; b=jl8RQOKfPSvCZH8H+tiPgW0oTwqQimfySyanW74F1UMHL3+IPw6YHgl19LAMDsPpuF ZKNq81PdpE/SCi1Efrdd/sg87Pnk+47Js0VWcnG45PSkscefYMDnvHpGbewAfsBkO63V 2Uf65RG07Q90SHZJWj/MPFWyNOJV8J8T19vxm2N/OidHiHGDBNBt1ISJsZnK9Icbam/B ovHgV7OLE5l6oEo5t1zZvCwUOfa1YyB7AXVbFql1mUoV19md3ACCR58FUgSjOh8kwxrg TS/lQyQU6eiSLifX2f1GzO7RGnuRae7oNHMexaDFVkNXY3kU7LIZDu1n12CuXNCgnZSg r5Lg== X-Gm-Message-State: AHYfb5gGJR6hCq9h7UwynfE5HLZKYlNChv6w70MgNHnEIEXV6vpjMrRA Zi/0KYBSyAiJFqxEu8q3/nOnYFRhREW9E8Xy8q23X0TQYKiQtrj9R7ON85DhtDJIEqSzNbKc3uN rPI1tDHG78ebRHBH0Urk= X-Received: by 10.31.216.133 with SMTP id p127mr1729274vkg.85.1504126787979; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 13:59:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.31.216.133 with SMTP id p127mr1729260vkg.85.1504126787651; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 13:59:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.103.172.15 with HTTP; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 13:59:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <05E636C1-1877-419E-8104-39DBBEDE307B@viagenie.ca> References: <05E636C1-1877-419E-8104-39DBBEDE307B@viagenie.ca> From: David Farmer Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 15:59:47 -0500 Message-ID: To: Marc Blanchet Cc: sunset4@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c07ad84e027080557fecee4" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sunset4] Working group last call on draft-ietf-sunset4-ipv6-ietf X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 20:59:51 -0000 --94eb2c07ad84e027080557fecee4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" I'm fine with the contents of the document itself. However, it's listed as Standards Track, as such maybe it should update RFC791. Otherwise, what is the intended Standards Track progression we expect to see for for this document, If we don't intend a progression would it be better as a BCP or Informational status then? I believe this is a first step in the formal depreciation of IPv4, as such it is subtly changing the status of RFC791, and therefore it should update RFC791. If we were deprecating IPv4 that would likely be an update to RFC791 to change it's status to Historic. The progression I expect, is at some future date we either take additional steps toward the formal deprecation of IPv4 or actually formally deprecate IPv4. Lets be honest, one purpose of this document is as more of a press release issued as an RFC. As such I think it's important for ISOC and others do press releases based on this document. However, I think it can be more than that if we treat it as more than that. Let's also use it as a catalyst to change our behavior as the IETF, which I read as one of it purposes as well. I think ensuring a metadata linkage with RFC791 could help this change occur. Thanks. On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 9:22 AM, Marc Blanchet wrote: > This is a working group last call on draft-ietf-sunset4-ipv6-ietf. Please > send comments to the mailing list by sept 15th, 23h59 UTC. If you read the > document and you agree but have no additional comments, please say so on > the mailing list. > > Marc&Wes, co-chairs. > > _______________________________________________ > sunset4 mailing list > sunset4@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 > -- =============================================== David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 =============================================== --94eb2c07ad84e027080557fecee4 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'm fine with the contents of the document itself. How= ever, it's listed as Standards Track, as such maybe it should update RF= C791. Otherwise, what is the intended Standards Track progression we expect= to see for for this document, If we don't intend a progression would i= t be better as a BCP or Informational status then?

I bel= ieve this is a first step in the formal depreciation of IPv4, as such it is= subtly changing the status of RFC791, and therefore it should update RFC79= 1. If we were deprecating IPv4 that would likely be an update to RFC791 to = change it's status to Historic.=C2=A0 The progression I expect, is at s= ome future date we either take additional steps toward the formal deprecati= on of IPv4 or actually formally deprecate IPv4.

Lets be honest, one purpose of this document is as more of a press = release issued as an RFC. As such I think it's important for ISOC and o= thers do press releases based on this document. However, I think it can be = more than that if we treat it as more than that. Let's also use it as a= catalyst to change our behavior as the IETF, which I read as one of it pur= poses as well. I think ensuring a metadata linkage with RFC791 could help t= his change occur.=C2=A0

Thanks.
<= /div>

On Wed, Aug = 30, 2017 at 9:22 AM, Marc Blanchet <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca&= gt; wrote:
This is a working group= last call on draft-ietf-sunset4-ipv6-ietf. Please send comments to the mai= ling list by sept 15th, 23h59 UTC. If you read the document and you agree b= ut have no additional comments, please say so on the mailing list.

Marc&Wes, co-chairs.

_______________________________________________
sunset4 mailing list
sunset4@ietf.org<= br> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4<= br>



--
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
David Farmer=C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0 Email:farmer@umn.edu
Networking & = Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
Universit= y of Minnesota=C2=A0=C2=A0
2218 University Ave SE=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029=C2=A0=C2=A0 Cell: = 612-812-9952
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D
--94eb2c07ad84e027080557fecee4-- From nobody Thu Aug 31 07:08:38 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42EA6132E08 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2017 07:08:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.3 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=swm.pp.se 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 WplymXRVpLFx for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2017 07:08:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (swm.pp.se [212.247.200.143]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49E82132E04 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2017 07:08:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id DDC06AF; Thu, 31 Aug 2017 16:08:00 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1504188480; bh=3C1mSMZ8X71sTIPLmQGp7cxXGG7i2Y2s7p3f6B2j+7g=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=EmHVEX4VXP9NWtoZCINLrL1cM91sx+1wTjUPo9+fetycY1z7ZkWyw6Gce1C8yPNe3 gZPJeprFDuT/78bNFkxxZy1t/Nw4BwEaem+oJG30ZOq5/CKB4DsX9cbl9zIKW+JONr W+VKbQD5MXexXF8MSYFEFN5KxI7V8p8zJm51qF0A= Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id C61C184; Thu, 31 Aug 2017 16:08:00 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2017 16:08:00 +0200 (CEST) From: Mikael Abrahamsson To: Marc Blanchet cc: sunset4@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <05E636C1-1877-419E-8104-39DBBEDE307B@viagenie.ca> Message-ID: References: <05E636C1-1877-419E-8104-39DBBEDE307B@viagenie.ca> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) Organization: People's Front Against WWW MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sunset4] Working group last call on draft-ietf-sunset4-ipv6-ietf X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2017 14:08:37 -0000 On Wed, 30 Aug 2017, Marc Blanchet wrote: > This is a working group last call on draft-ietf-sunset4-ipv6-ietf. > Please send comments to the mailing list by sept 15th, 23h59 UTC. If you > read the document and you agree but have no additional comments, please > say so on the mailing list. I re-read this document and it seems fine to me. This will be an interesting IETF last call. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se