Hi Randy,
In my opinion the primary goal is to have everybody getting the work done, then testing our own protocols. Non-goal is to have individuals own stuff tested.
Also, I’m speaking only about the main Wireless SSID. We can keep other SSID and the terminal room Ethernet ports, pure dual stack as we have today, which allows testing your own stuff and sorting out possible issues in case of “emergency” or major breach of our tests.
NAT64 is not useful because you need to manually write down what works, what not. That’s why I’m suggesting having a first hop router with, for example a modified OpenWRT version of 464XLAT, which logs each use of CLAT and PLAT. This way we could get an automatic list of what are the apps that fail to work with IPv6, which ones work with only PLAT, and which ones need CLAT.
Regards,
Jordi
-----Mensaje original-----
De: ietf <ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx> en nombre de Randy Bush <randy@xxxxxxx>
Responder a: <randy@xxxxxxx>
Fecha: jueves, 17 de noviembre de 2016, 9:16
Para: Jordi Palet Martinez <jordi.palet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
CC: IETF discussion list <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
Asunto: Re: IETF network incremental plan
last evening i was carrying a question from the noc team but my position
in the mic queue was preempted by more important people.
but essentially, before we make tactical decisions we would like to know
what the purpose and goal of the meeting network is.
o folk just want to get work done, and the net should bloody well work
o i want to forward test internet futures: ipv6, auth methods, crypto,
...
o i have my own stuff i want to test (which may need inbound sessions)
o network? what network?
in the nat64 case, are we trying to validate the well-known lists of
what does not work over nat64, spotify, many vpns, ...? if it is
because we think we can modify nat64 to ameliorate the problems, this
would be brilliant.
if we know what the goals are, we should be able to meet them. so far,
the assumption is that
o the primary goal of the meeting netowrk is for attendees to get work
done
o nats breaking applications and inbound connections would be
considered as breakage
o we do want to support occasional experiments, both non-disruptive
and visible (remember the v6-only plenary?)
o but basically, i just want my mtv
randy, not speaking for anyone else
**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company
This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.