On 03/08/2017 03:04, Christian Huitema wrote: > > > On 8/2/2017 7:51 AM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: >> Then I guess we fully agree, and I believe I was the first one reminding that our network is a production one … >> >> As we already had a NAT64 SSID for some time, the right step for IETF100 will be then to have a CLAT SSID, so it can be tested by those folks that want to test it. >> >> I’m happy to help the NOC team to do that if they need help. >> >> Regards, >> Jordi > > That would be good, especially if the CLAT network did NOT include any > DNS64 function. There is a growing suspicion that hacking the DNS in the > name of IPv6 transition was a really bad idea. we have heard it many > times -- breaking DNSSEC, not working with VPN, or Netflix, or Skype. > Also, we know that a large fraction of DNS query are served by Google > DNS and other global providers, which means that the DNS64 hacking > server will not see them. So, if we could demonstrate that DNS64 is not > needed for transition, that would be great. Yes. The fact of life is that most of us live with NAT44 anyway; I don't like it, but there is nothing I do regularly that is broken by NAT44. I'd be mildly disturbed if the IETF SSID offered Net 10, but I'm sure it would work nicely. If the back end was CLAT, how would I even know? Brian