Subject: (ngtrans) draft minutes of NGtrans WG Meeting at IETF46 in WashDC

From: Bob Fink <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 09:57:05 -0800

NGtrans folk,

Enclosed is my first draft based on Tony's notes, and my reformatting. 
Please send any errors, omissions, changes, etc. to me.

I'll publish the minutes of the IPv6 Ops Topics meeting separately soon 
(really an extension of the IPv6 meeting to cover 6bone related topics).

Thanks for a good meeting!

Bob

=============================
Minutes of NGtrans WG Meeting
8 November 1999
Washington DC IETF
___

Chairs:

Alain Durand <[email-masked]>
Bob Fink <[email-masked]>
Tony Hain <[email-masked]>

This ngtrans meeting reported by Alain Durand, Bob Fink and Tony Hain.
Attendance was estimated as 200+ (didn't actually count the names).

Alain Durand chaired the meeting.

___

Administrative information:

Discussion ngtrans: <mailto: [email-masked]>
Subscribe ngtrans: <mailto: [email-masked]> "subscribe ngtrans"
Archive ngtrans: (I'll replace with the newer archive)
Web site: <http://www.6bone.net/ngtrans>

Discussion 6bone: <mailto: [email-masked]>
Subscribe 6bone: <mailto: [email-masked]> "subscribe 6bone"
Archive 6bone: (I'll replace with the newer archive)
Web site: <http://www.6bone.net>

___

Agenda

Tokyo meeting network configuration - Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino

*BSD Update - Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino

NGtrans Project Status - Bob Fink

6bone Prequalification for Address Prefix Allocation (6papa-00) - Bob Fink

Transition strategy for transition documentation - Alain Durand

6to4 (6to4-03) - Brian Carpenter

DSTM (dstm-00) - Jim Bound

Tunnel Broker (broker-02) - Ivano Guardini

Tunnel setup - Marc Blanchet

Bump-In-the-Stack (bis-00) - Kazuaki Tsuchiya

---

Tokyo meeting network configuration - Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino

Itojun described the Tokyo IPng Interim WG meeting network configuration. 
This network was an IPv6 only network with
four IPv6 prefixes advertised and three native IPv6 connections (NTT, IIJ, 
WIDE), plus an IPv6 to IPv4 translator. Statistics of the meeting's network 
use are:

   80+ attendees
   20+ nodes (= IPv6 nodes) in user segment
   100 times more IPv6 traffic than IPv4 traffic!
  1627 translated TCP connection
       878 http, 846 SSL, 88 pop3, 46 telnet, 32 ssh, 16 smtp, 5 ftp
       3ffe:501:0:18aa::x.y.z.u gets translated to x.y.z.u
       DNS server side hack will automatically enable it

   DNS needed IPv4 (root servers)

   Src/dst selection, default router selection
     Latter seems more important in this config

---

*BSD Update - Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino

Itojun reported on the project to unify IPv6 for *BSD systems by 
consolidating the best parts of the three NRL, INRIA and KAME stacks. Due 
to incompatibilites beween the three the *BSD version it was decided to 
base the *BSD version on KAME, with inputs from NRL and INRIA. NRL and 
INRIA will also do future IPv6 experiments on KAME.

Status:

   NetBSD: merged KAME stack in June 1999, will ship in 1.5
   FreeBSD: KAME merge effort started, will ship in 4.x
   OpenBSD: hope to incorporate KAME into 2.7
   BSDI: 4.0 has NRL code, will switch to KAME

You will be able to buy KAME/FreeBSD-ready PC off the shelf!

  <http://www.plathome.co.jp/>

---

NGtrans Project Status - Bob Fink

Bob gave a status review of NGtrans Projects based on the new ngtrans 
project status webpage that he will keep up-to-date as possible. It may be 
seen at:

<http://www.6bone.net/ngtrans/ngtrans_project-status.html>

Bob reported on the BT IPR notification and that the next step will be to 
follow IETF procedures with no discussion in ngtrans until that is done. 
These procedures call for requesting more information of the IPR holder, in 
particular details of the IPR and whether they will give low/no-cost 
licenses for its use. After all available information is in hand, the 
working group can decide whether or not to proceed with any project that 
may be affected based on this information.

---

6bone Prequalification for Address Prefix Allocation (6papa-00) - Bob Fink

Bob gave a brief overview of the 6papa-00 I-D which resulted from the 
IAB/IANA/RIR IPv6 Prefix Allocation policy process when it was agreed to 
allow the 6bone as a prequalification process for address prefix allocation 
as a part of the RIR bootstrap process. See:

<http://www.arin.net/regserv/ipv6/IPv6.txt>, section 4.1.1:

	"... The requesting organization must demonstrate that it has experience 
with IPv6 through active participation in the 6bone project for at least 
six months, during which time it operated a pseudo-TLA (pTLA) for at least 
three months. The Regional IRs may require documentation of acceptable 
6Bone routing policies and practice from the requesting organization."

Bob noted that the RIRs are asking him (as 6bone lead and ngtrans co-chair) 
to validate if a subTLA requestor meets the 6bone pTLA requirements, to 
which he factually replies, not saying whether the requestor should get a 
subTLA, just that they meet the requirements agreed to by the above policy 
and the 6bone's own pTLA rules.

Bob asked for consensus from the ngtrans/6bone community for the early RIR 
agreement by moving it into Informational RFC form and support for him to 
continue to handle the requests from the RIRs for this for now. Then in 
addition, help in setting up a 6bone steering group for this purpose so 
it's not just one person doing it.

As next steps, Bob will issue a cleaned up 6papa draft (-01) for comment on 
the ngtrans and 6bone lists, and probe the 6bone list re the formation of a 
6bone steering group for RIR request recommendations process.

---

Transition strategy for transition documentation - Alain Durand

Alain presented his ideas on the structure of transition for purposes of 
writing a transition document. See:

<http://www.6bone.net/ngtrans/IETF46-WashDC/Durand-Strategy.ppt>

Jim Bound asked Alain to remove his comment in the slides about 'no dns 
trick', as he claimed that customers have asked for it. Alain said that 
this will be released as separate document, or added to roadmap, TBD.

The slides above show Jim's change.

---

6to4 (6to4-03) - Brian Carpenter

Brian reported on the substantive changes from -02:

<http://www.6bone.net/ngtrans/IETF46-WashDC/Carpenter-6to4.ppt>

Substantive Changes from -02
• changed to officially assigned TLA value
• sections of text re-ordered for clarity
• "do not fragment" is now SHOULD NOT (adopting the decision reached for 
6over4)
• new version of address selection text
• bogus MTU text deleted
• a few additional scenarios and pictures
• clarifications/response to detail comments

Issues:

• Address selection text needs revision when general WG debate is settled;
   precedence for 6to4 versus native addresses needs to be configurable.
• Concern that routing loops must be shown to be impossible by construct 
(Randy Bush)
• Concern that multicast routing needs more precision (Erik Nordmark)
• Some people object to referring to a "6to4 interface" and others object to
   calling it a "pseudo-interface" (Draves, Nordmark,…)
• Some people object to discussing BGP and routing updates at all (Bound et al)
• Sending rule needs to cover next-hop as well as final destination (Bound 
et al)
• Need to clarify that IPv4ADDR = link layer address (Bound et al)
• Bugs in alignment and padding text (Bound et al)
• some other clarification/explanation points (Bound et al)
• terminology section and applicability statement
• host-only model and draft

Brian noted that comments on address selection are deferred until the 
outcome of IPng WG work on this.

A comment was made that Randy's concern about about routing loops be 
'impossible' is too strong.

A comment was made that there needs to be clarity between text and 
potential implementations.

                         v4 is link layer leads to interface rather than pseudo

Jim Bound commented that either cover BGP fully or don't mention it at all.

Brian asked Jim when the rest of his group's comments would come on 6to4 as 
he had noted in the original comments he made that there would be more. Jim 
replied that 2 weeks.

Brian noted that he would like to have an additional co-author due to his 
and Keith Moore's time constraints.

Steve Deering that 6to4 is not a complete solution: dns, basic mechanisms, 
need to make sure doc is clear about applicatbility, terminology needs to 
be added, and may need additional specs for host implementations.

It was noted that several implementations were in progress.

Perry Metzger wanted *bsd as default stack implementation.

Jim Bound noted his company is moving into production mode to ship. ; linux 
focus

Steve Deering noted that boundary routers are the implementation target not 
host.

Bob Fink noted that a 6to4 relay was being agressivly worked for the 6tap.

---

DSTM (dstm-00) - Jim Bound

Jim Bound gave a high level overview of the DSTM-00 draft recently issued, 
noting that it is integrated DTI and AIIH.

Jim promised a new draft soon with reworked diagrams and other 
improvements. He will submit extensions to the DHCPv6 wg.

He hopes to be able to send DSTM to the IESG for PS in July, 2000.

Brian Carpenter asked Jim to describe the remaining relationship to dns? 
Jim said there is a gethostnymane call, the AIIH  server returns a cname, 
which will be forwarded to site to the site dns which concatenates it.

Alain Durand asked will the dns part be 'required' to be DSTM. Jim 
responded that needs to be discussed.

Jim expressed his desire to have no translators be PS.

When asked if there are any implementations, Jim responded that there is 
one partially done that might be done in a few months.

---

Tunnel Broker (broker-02) - Ivano Guardini

Ivano asked for links to be placed on well know pages for the tunnel 
brokers so they can be easily found.

Perry Metzger said that he will put one on v6.org right after this meeting.

---

Tunnel setup - Marc Blanchet

Marc presented his ideas for tunnel setup:

<http://www.6bone.net/ngtrans/IETF46-WashDC/Blanchet-tunnel-setup.ppt>

He noted that there is no authentication with the current process, that it 
is difficult to implement on routers.

He proposed a protocol that creates a control connection, basically CHAP 
authentication and some commands.

Marc was encouraged to update the draft for submission as an ngtrans draft.

Jim Bound asked why not use DHCPv6. MArc was concerned about the time to 
resolve DHCPv6 and/or to add to it.

Perry Metzger noted that you need to add a DHCPv6 request in v4 packet.

Erik Nordmark noted that this has more authentication issues.

---

Introduction to IPv6 Transition (iit-02) - Henk Steenman

  Henk noted that the -02 version  included Tim Larder's independent draft, 
as well as adding examples & tools.

He expecgts completion at the next IETF.

Brian Carpenter noted that the Utrecht meeting recommendation wants ngtrans 
to address evolution from a NAT-based IPv4 world as well.

Alain Durand noted that one scenario had included NAT.

Perry Metzger noted that ISPs may be blocking some protocol types, which 
affects use of tunneling.

He noted that GRE over UDP as a tool needs a standard port number.

---

Bump-In-the-Stack (bis-00) - Kazuaki Tsuchiya

It was noted that bis-oo will be forwarded to the IESG after this IETF.

Kazuaki kindly abbreviated his presentation due to limited meeting time to 
speak of only the recent Toolnet6 Installation Workshop held during the 
IETF IPng Interim Meeting in Tokyo last month.

Toolnet6 is a transition tool based on the BIS draft. An early realease of 
the new version was given to participants, including in its features 
Stateless Address Autoconfiguration and a DNS resolver function via IPv6.

All participants succeeded in the installation of Toolnet6, which included 
1 WinNT and 4 Win98 users.

---

Meeting adjourned.

-end