Sorry, I don't agree: Yes we can STOP vendors. If they don't match the document, they will not be complaint with the RFC, and thus pass interoperability/conformance test.
This is the same way we ask them to implement things. This time we ask them NOT to implement it. Jordi ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Chown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Brian E Carpenter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2003 11:25 PM Subject: Re: avoiding NAT with IPv6 > Brian, > > If the phrasing focuses on rewriting of the source address, then we do > not preclude use of fec0::/10 for disconnected networks, router zeroconf, > or elsewhere. We just say "IPv6 nodes MUST NOT rewrite IPv6 source > addresses when processing packets". > > As Pekka said, fec0::/10 need not be blackholed - it can be treated as > a global address instead with no special processing. > > Clearly we do not want NAT, but we cannot ban it as such or stop vendors > providing what customers want. > > However, we also still have to be realistic in enabling ad-hoc or > intermittently connected networks, so I like the idea of discouraging the > functionality in products (even without site-locals, people will pick > address blocks to use, and we may see leakage of "hijacked" addresses and > all manner of problems as a result...) > > Still, I guess this morning's vote will focus minds :) > > Tim > > On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 10:39:59PM +0100, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > > I'd vote for a MUST NOT in node requirements, if we can find a suitable > > phrasing. It may well be violated by vendors, but it makes the situation > > unambiguous. > > > > Brian > > > > JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: > > > > > > After the today's decision with site local, is clear to me that we don't want to > > > have NAT happening again ;-) > > > > > > We know that the people will do it anyway, but we must do an effort to avoid is > > > as much as possible, and some ideas that could > > > support this are: > > > > > > 1) Clearly show the advantages of end-to-end and no NAT model. > > > 2) Have the specs indicating that an IPv6 node (host/router, whatever) MUST NOT > > > support NAT or equivalent mechanisms. Any > > > interoperability/conformance test must fail if you fail to agree with this > > > specification. This should be a clear sign for the > > > manufacturers to avoid supporting NATs. > > > 3) Indicate that if someone wants to keep using NAT, should do it with IPv4. > > > > > > I'm not sure if the rest agree and what is the correct document to say this, may > > > be as part of the changes for the local-link > > > deprecation ? > > > > > > Regards, > > > Jordi > > > > > > ***************************** > > > Madrid 2003 Global IPv6 Summit > > > 12-14 May 2003 - Register at: > > > http://www.ipv6-es.com > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List > > > IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng > > > FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng > > > Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List > > IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng > > FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng > > Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List > IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng > FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng > Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > ***************************** Madrid 2003 Global IPv6 Summit 12-14 May 2003 - Register at: http://www.ipv6-es.com -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
