Not really so easy like that …
The reason I can’t use the NAT64 (unless I run my own CLAT VM, which requires the NOC to assign a /64 to my own laptop, as I did in the IETF98, or there is a CLAT in that network), is that Office is not working if the destinations are IPv4-only.
For example, I’ve email accounts that are IPv4-only. They don’t work. I’ve also one gmail email account, which is only a backup, I never use it. The gmail servers are dual-stack, so they work fine with Office for Mac.
I’m guessing that the Microsoft guys at the IETF use Microsoft OS (which already includes CLAT), so unless the failure is the same and fails as well in Microsoft OS with Office for windows, the Microsoft employees aren’t going to “suffer” the same pain as Mac OS users running Office for Mac.
So in my opinion, in a considerable %, this effort is useless.
The folks that are involved in deploying IPv6 in many networks worldwide (as it is my own case), we know without the need to try in the IETF network, that we can’t deploy IPv6-only in the LANs. We know that many apps/devices will not work if we do that. We know what is the real world, and we know that is a matter of time (probably more than 5 years) for ISPs to deliver IPv6-only WAN with IPv6-only LANs.
You can’t force customer to throw away their IP cameras, NAS, or all kind of old systems or business apps with IPv4-only support. Even if we tell the vendors, they will do it when they want, and all the products from vendors that don’t exists anymore will never be updated.
Regards,
Jordi
-----Mensaje original-----
De: ietf <ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx> en nombre de Ted Lemon <mellon@xxxxxxxxx>
Responder a: <mellon@xxxxxxxxx>
Fecha: domingo, 30 de julio de 2017, 15:27
Para: Lee Howard <lee@xxxxxxxxxx>
CC: IETF Rinse Repeat <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
Asunto: Re: RESENDING - Incremental Deployment of IPv6-only Wi-Fi for IETF Meetings
On Jul 30, 2017, at 7:53 AM, Lee Howard <lee@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
How would default-NAT64 get application developers to fix their
applications?
One of the biggest offenders historically was a Cisco VPN, so presumably having Cisco people experience that being borken would help. Similarly with Microsoft people and the Windows Update issue that was mentioned earlier. Desire to avoid public embarrassment is a useful motivating factor.
**********************************************
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.