Subject: [v6ops] Weekly Review: draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-deployment

From: Ron Bonica <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2018 13:19:54 +0000

Folks,

Each week between now and IETF 103, we will review and discuss one draft with an eye towards progressing it.

This week, please review and comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-deployment.

                                                Fred and Ron

---

From: Lencse Gábor <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2018 22:06:28 +0200

Dear Jordi,

I have read draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-deployment and found a few nits, 
usually typos.

I recommend the following corrections (in the manner: "old text" --> 
"new text"):

1. a.
"how as been configured" --> perhaps: "how it has been configured" ?

3.1.1
(below Fig. 3)
"This is an scenario" --> "This is a scenario"

3.1.2
"Furthermore, as indicated in [RFC6877] (464XLAT), can be used in"
-->
"Furthermore, as indicated in [RFC6877], 464XLAT can be used in"

3.3.
"In some cases, a "bad" idem is not necessarily"
-->
"In some cases, a "bad" item is not necessarily"

4.1.
"they don't perform validation themselves an instead, rely"
-->
"they don't perform validation themselves and instead, rely"

5.
"considered de simpler" --> "considered the simpler"

13.2.
    [DNS64-Benchm]
               G. Lencse and Y. Kadobayashi, "Benchmarking DNS64
               Implementations: Theory and Practice", September 2018.
-->
    [DNS64-Benchm]
               G. Lencse and Y. Kadobayashi, "Benchmarking DNS64
               Implementations: Theory and Practice", Computer
               Communications, vol. 127, no. 1, pp. 61-74, September 1,
               2018, DOI: 10.1016/j.comcom.2018.05.005

    [Threat-DNS64]
               G. Lencse and Y. Kadobayashi, "Methodology for the
               identification of potential security issues of different
               IPv6 transition technologies: Threat analysis of DNS64 and
               stateful NAT64", September 2018.
-->
    [Threat-DNS64]
               G. Lencse and Y. Kadobayashi, "Methodology for the
               identification of potential security issues of different
               IPv6 transition technologies: Threat analysis of DNS64 and
               stateful NAT64", Computers & Security (Elsevier), vol. 77,
               no. 1, pp. 397-411, August 1, 2018, DOI:
               10.1016/j.cose.2018.04.012

(Now our papers are fully citable, please include the complete 
bibliographic data.)

Best regards,

Gábor

P.S.: I hope to be able to contribute with NAT64 benchmarking results in 
about a half year. One of my PhD students has implemented an RFC 8219 
compliant NAT64 tester. Now it is in a very alpha state, but I hope that 
we will be able to use it for comparing the performances of several 
NAT64 implementations during the fall semester.

8/6/2018 3:19 PM keltezéssel, Ron Bonica írta:
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

---

From: Fred Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2018 14:17:02 -0700

> On Aug 6, 2018, at 1:06 PM, Lencse Gábor <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> P.S.: I hope to be able to contribute with NAT64 benchmarking results in about a half year. One of my PhD students has implemented an RFC 8219 compliant NAT64 tester. Now it is in a very alpha state, but I hope that we will be able to use it for comparing the performances of several NAT64 implementations during the fall semester.

We'll be interested in its results whenever they come. First choice would be "before IETF 103", and the next would be "before IETF 104".

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The fact that there is a highway to hell and a stairway to heaven is an interesting comment on projected traffic volume...

---

From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2018 16:22:29 -0500

Hi Gabor,

I've corrected all your points in a new version that I'm editing. Thanks a lot!

Regarding the NAT64 benchmarking, I fear that if this is going to take half a year, we can't wait for it, as it may become a showstopper for this document publication. We can make a -bis or another document at that time.

Last issue, I don't see how to make the complete bibliographic data, because I've already it, and it gets cutdown by the submission system. This is what I've in case you know an alternative way:

      <reference anchor="Threat-DNS64">

        <front>

          <title>Methodology for the identification of potential security issues of different IPv6 transition technologies: Threat analysis of DNS64 and stateful NAT64</title>

          <author surname="G. Lencse and Y. Kadobayashi">

            <organization>Computers &amp; Security (Elsevier), vol. 77, no. 1, pp. 397-411, DOI: 10.1016/j.cose.2018.04.012</organization>

          </author>

          <date month="September" year="2018" />

        </front>

      </reference>

      <reference anchor="DNS64-Benchm">

        <front>

          <title>Benchmarking DNS64 Implementations: Theory and Practice</title>

          <author surname="G. Lencse and Y. Kadobayashi">

            <organization>Computers Communications (Elsevier), vol. 127, no. 1, pp. 61-74, September 1, 2018, DOI: 10.1016/j.comcom.2018.05.005</organization>

          </author>

          <date month="September" year="2018" />

        </front>

      </reference>

Regards,

Jordi

-----Mensaje original-----

De: v6ops <[email-masked]> en nombre de Lencse Gábor <[email-masked]>

Fecha: lunes, 6 de agosto de 2018, 15:07

Para: <[email-masked]>

Asunto: Re: [v6ops] Weekly Review: draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-deployment

    Dear Jordi,

    usually typos.

    "new text"):

    1. a.

    3.1.1

    (below Fig. 3)

    3.1.2

    -->

    3.3.

    -->

    4.1.

    -->

    5.

    13.2.

        [DNS64-Benchm]

    -->

        [DNS64-Benchm]

    

        [Threat-DNS64]

    -->

        [Threat-DNS64]

    bibliographic data.)

    Best regards,

    Gábor

    

    v6ops mailing list

    [email-masked]

**********************************************
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 exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.