I agree that the concept of ??? (reachability boundaries?) needs a name.
Keith > Fine. The concept I described is relevant, even if (as both Brian and > I point out) it is not the same as the one RFC 2663/3103 talk about. > We'll use a different word so you don't have to worry about it. > > On Apr 30, 2010, at 6:14 AM, Keith Moore wrote: > >> Even if one accepts the need for v6-v6 NAT (I do not) that's still >> not a justification for IPv6 addressing realms. >>> Look at the "cc" line of this email. >>> >>> On Apr 30, 2010, at 3:11 AM, Keith Moore wrote: >>> >>>> Why is there a need for such a concept as "IPv6 realm"? >>>> >>>> It seems to me that if we ever create IPv6 realms in the sense that realms >>>> exist in IPv4 (i.e. if we make IPv6 addresses ambiguous), we've >>>> irrevocably broken IPv6. >>>> >>>> And if we end up creating a subtly different concept in IPv6 - something >>>> like realms without the potential for address assignment conflicts - it >>>> will be confusing to call such things realms. >>>> >>>> But I really think the right thing to do is to make explicit that there is >>>> only one "realm" for the entire IPv6 address space. >>>> >>>> Keith >>>>> We got a definition for "IPv4 realm", based on RFC 2663 (but also RFC >>>>> 3103). >>>>> Both RFC's are IPv4 oriented, not providing an explicit definition for >>>>> an "IPv6 realm". >>>>> >>>>> This question might be related to NAT66, because the IPv4 realm concept >>>>> is originating from NAT44. >>>>> >>>>> Does anyone know a correspondent definition/reference for IPv6 realm? >>>>> >>>>> If not, I'd like to offer an initial proposal for discussion, - a common >>>>> realm term for IPv4 and IPv6: >>>>> >>>>> (IPv4 or IPv6 address) realm: is defined as a set of addresses, which >>>>> share all a common prefix, that are mutually reachable (thus, within a >>>>> single IP routing domain). >>>>> >>>>> Note: "IPv6 realm" definition based on the GLOBAL UNICAST ADDRESS format >>>>> (ยง 2.5.4/RFC 4291) because this is a hierarchical format using a "global >>>>> routing prefix", which is assigned to a "site" (i.e. sth like a REALM). >>>>> Comments would be appreciated, >>>>> Albrecht >>>>> _____ >>>>> RFC 2663 IP Network Address Translator (NAT) Terminology and >>>>> Considerations >>>>> 2.1. Address realm or realm >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> An address realm is a network domain in which the network addresses >>>>> are uniquely assigned to entities such that datagrams can be routed >>>>> to them. Routing protocols used within the network domain are >>>>> responsible for finding routes to entities given their network >>>>> addresses. Note that this document is limited to describing NAT in >>>>> IPv4 environment and does not address the use of NAT in other types >>>>> of environment. (e.g. IPv6 environments) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> RFC 3103 Realm Specific IP: Protocol Specification >>>>> 3. Terminology >>>>> Private Realm >>>>> >>>>> A routing realm that uses private IP addresses from the ranges >>>>> (10.0.0.0/8, 172.16.0.0/12, 192.168.0.0/16) specified in >>>>> [ >>>>> RFC1918 >>>>> ], or addresses that are non-routable from the Internet. >>>>> >>>>> Public Realm >>>>> >>>>> A routing realm with unique network addresses assigned by the >>>>> Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) or an equivalent address >>>>> registry. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> nat66 mailing list >>>>> >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66 >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> nat66 mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66 >>> >>> http://www.ipinc.net/IPv4.GIF >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> nat66 mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66 > > http://www.ipinc.net/IPv4.GIF >
_______________________________________________ nat66 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
