On 28/07/17 21:38, Eric Rescorla wrote: > I'm not very enthusiastic about this. People come to the IETF to do work > and having > to deal with potential bustage from this experiment gets in the way of that. > +1 IIUC correctly this'd also break DNSSEC for some names and has to. If so, I'd be against it. S. > -Ekr > > > On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 12:33 AM, Brzozowski, John < > John_Brzozowski@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Apologies, I understand this mail did not make it to the various lists. >> >> John >> +1-484-962-0060 >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: John Brzozowski <John_Brzozowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Date: Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 20:28 >> To: "draft-jjmb-v6ops-ietf-ipv6-only-incremental@xxxxxxxx" < >> draft-jjmb-v6ops-ietf-ipv6-only-incremental@xxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Randy Bush <randy@xxxxxxx>, Alissa Cooper <alissa@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jim >> Martin <jim@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@xxxxxxxxx>, Suresh >> Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@xxxxxxxxx>, Russ Housley <housley@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Subject: Incremental Deployment of IPv6-only Wi-Fi for IETF Meetings >> >> Folks, >> >> Apologies in advance for the gratuitous cross posting (v6ops, ietf, >> ipv6, sunset4, softwires). I hope, to you all, this is worth the added >> email. >> >> The draft below was written to provide the necessary documentation to >> enable the IETF (the NOC, participants, etc.) to migrate to an IPv6 only >> primary network connection (Wi-Fi and wired) that utilizes NAT64+DNS64 to >> access IPv4 only content. The request for IETF 99 has been to have the >> primary “ietf†SSID adhere to what is documented in the I-D below. I trust >> the motivation is understood. This means that the main “ietf†SSID would >> be switched to be IPv6 only with NAT64+DNS64 (at layer 3) per the I-D >> below. Given the that IETF99 is upon us, this may or may not be entirely >> possible. >> >> At this stage, the infrastructure preparations for IETF 99 should be >> in place to ensure that the IETF has the necessary hardware for redundancy >> and performance. >> >> So, we are all seeking your input. Given the above, what would all >> you suggest is tolerable for IETF99 as it pertains to the I-D below? >> >> • IPv6 only per the I-D for the balance of IETF week? >> • IPv6 only per the I-D for one or more days this week? >> • IPv6 only per the I-D for the plenary? >> • IPv6 only per the I-D for the next IETF meeting? >> >> Please send us your feedback. >> >> Regards, >> >> John >> +1-484-962-0060 >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: "internet-drafts@xxxxxxxx" <internet-drafts@xxxxxxxx> >> Date: Saturday, July 1, 2017 at 03:04 >> To: Marcus Keane <marcus.keane@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jen Linkova < >> furry@xxxxxxxxxx>, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@xxxxxxxxxx>, John Brzozowski < >> John_Brzozowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Erik Kline <ek@xxxxxxxxxx>, John >> Brzozowski <John_Brzozowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, David Schinazi < >> dschinazi@xxxxxxxxx>, Stuart Cheshire <cheshire@xxxxxxxxx>, Jen Linkova < >> furry@xxxxxxxxxx>, Paul Saab <ps@xxxxxx>, David Schinazi < >> dschinazi@xxxxxxxxx> >> Subject: New Version Notification for draft-jjmb-v6ops-ietf-ipv6- >> only-incremental-00.txt >> >> >> A new version of I-D, draft-jjmb-v6ops-ietf-ipv6- >> only-incremental-00.txt >> has been successfully submitted by John Jason Brzozowski and >> posted to the >> IETF repository. >> >> Name: draft-jjmb-v6ops-ietf-ipv6-only-incremental >> Revision: 00 >> Title: Incremental Deployment of IPv6-only Wi-Fi for IETF >> Meetings >> Document date: 2017-06-30 >> Group: Individual Submission >> Pages: 15 >> URL: https://www.ietf.org/internet- >> drafts/draft-jjmb-v6ops-ietf-ipv6-only-incremental-00.txt >> Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ >> doc/draft-jjmb-v6ops-ietf-ipv6-only-incremental/ >> Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/ >> draft-jjmb-v6ops-ietf-ipv6-only-incremental-00 >> Htmlized: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ >> doc/html/draft-jjmb-v6ops-ietf-ipv6-only-incremental-00 >> >> >> Abstract: >> The purpose of this document is to provide a blueprint and >> guidance >> for deploying IPv6-only Wi-Fi at IETF meetings. This document >> outlines infrastructure and operational guidance that operators >> should consider when deploying IPv6-only networks using NAT64 >> and >> DNS64 to support communication to legacy IPv4-only services. >> >> >> >> >> 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. >> >> The IETF Secretariat >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature