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