Re: [sunset4] Closing Sunset4

Thanks! Regards, Jordi -Mensaje original- De: sunset4 <sunset4-boun...@ietf.org> en nombre de Terry Manderson <terry.mander...@icann.org> Fecha: miércoles, 16 de mayo de 2018, 5:48 Para: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.pa...@consulintel.es>, "sunset4@ietf.org"

Re: [sunset4] Closing Sunset4

I disagree with this decision. Just look into any other WG. Compare the number of people in the mailing list and the number of contributions. This is a general issue in IETF, most of the people in the list is not really contributing at all. I think sunset4 is needed, and it may happen that

Re: [sunset4] [DNSOP] New Version Notification for draft-palet-sunset4-ipv6-ready-dns-00.txt

mbre de 2017, 0:47 Para: Fred Baker <fredbaker.i...@gmail.com> CC: "v6...@ietf.org WG" <v6...@ietf.org>, <6...@ietf.org>, Daniel Karrenberg <dan...@karrenberg.net>, <dn...@ietf.org>, <sunset4@ietf.org>, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.pa...@con

Re: [sunset4] New Version Notification for draft-palet-sunset4-ipv6-ready-dns-00.txt

nsaje original- De: sunset4 <sunset4-boun...@ietf.org> en nombre de Fred Baker <fredbaker.i...@gmail.com> Responder a: <fredbaker.i...@gmail.com> Fecha: sábado, 25 de noviembre de 2017, 20:01 Para: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.pa...@consulintel.es> CC: <dn...@ie

Re: [sunset4] New Version Notification for draft-palet-sunset4-ipv6-ready-dns-00.txt

By the way, forgot to mention something else. I’ve started also to work in a policy proposal for ICANN in order to make sure that we get aligned. Regards, Jordi -Mensaje original- De: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.pa...@consulintel.es> Fecha: viernes, 24 de noviembre de 2017,

[sunset4] FW: New Version Notification for draft-palet-sunset4-ipv6-ready-dns-00.txt

viernes, 24 de noviembre de 2017, 21:30 Para: Jordi Palet Martinez <jordi.pa...@theipv6company.com>, Jordi Martinez <jordi.pa...@theipv6company.com> Asunto: New Version Notification for draft-palet-sunset4-ipv6-ready-dns-00.txt A new version of I-D, draft-palet-sunset4-ipv6-

Re: [sunset4] Working group last call on draft-ietf-sunset4-ipv6-ietf

I just read the document again, and I’m fine in moving it forward. Regards, Jordi -Mensaje original- De: sunset4 en nombre de Marc Blanchet Responder a: Fecha: miércoles, 30 de agosto de 2017, 16:22

Re: [sunset4] [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt

edbaker.i...@gmail.com> Fecha: jueves, 17 de agosto de 2017, 1:30 Para: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.pa...@consulintel.es> CC: "sunset4@ietf.org" <sunset4@ietf.org>, <v6...@ietf.org> Asunto: Re: [v6ops] [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt

Re: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-09.txt

(copying v6ops) Forgot something here regarding: 4. Write a guidance document for IPv4-on-demand, covering problems 10-14. I think this can be done in draft-palet-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-transition-00, which I plan to review next week (in this case I believe it belongs to v6ops), otherwise, I will

Re: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-08.txt

de Leo Gaspard <l...@gaspard.io> Responder a: <l...@gaspard.io> Fecha: martes, 27 de junio de 2017, 0:42 Para: <sunset4@ietf.org> Asunto: Re: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-08.txt On 06/26/2017 08:05 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: > Reg

Re: [sunset4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sunset4-gapanalysis-08.txt

Hi, In general I agree with the document. I’ve just a couple of comments. If we are talking about phases, we should not use migration, but transition. In many languages, when you translate migration, it means “dropping IPv4 and using only-IPv6”, which is not the case, and is not the spirit of

Re: [sunset4] ietf-nat64

As you should expect, many apps don’t work in NAT64. Is “broken”, in the sense that is not the “good and complete” solution, unless we are able to convince all the app developers, for all the devices that we carry in this case inside the IETF network, to make sure that those apps don’t use

Re: [sunset4] Sunset4 work

y boils down to is that edge networks need some sort of CPE > or Gateway to the provider network. Do we want that CPE to provide > dualstack locally or IPv6-only when the provider addresses run out. > Back to the IETF SSID, what SSN vision do you wish to showcase? (I'

Re: [sunset4] Sunset4 work

on do you wish to showcase? (I'd prefer a choice for long term rather than "for next meeting" and I'd go for something like Jordi's 464xlat in the CPE! Choose wisely :-) If an IPv6-only SSID is just to showcase IPsec VPNs still failing, it is a bit of a waste of people's time). Reg

Re: [sunset4] Sunset4 work

Despite how much I like all those ideas, I don't think we are ready to have an IPv6-only IETF network. Unfortunately, there are many applications, VPNs, etc., which will not work just with NAT64, because literals, etc. I will suggest something alternative at this stage: Having the IETF