From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20F8221F417 for ; Sat, 13 Jun 2015 19:09:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DC3B20A27 for ; Sat, 13 Jun 2015 22:09:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 13 Jun 2015 22:09:58 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hmh.eng.br; h=cc :content-type:date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:subject:to:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=/LfYp KKz82Nw7wShJmc3NsDrClA=; b=sLw/SFjOUGrzkXouW6eLHYKsDs0rzos09q1fO 93ttg0rLqpaYbv+JzLAf+IiEw2YoEGo5bkgkMfcfvdST8+J1WlQTUsHkuKCE4o1j TVv+71thSsfnCcSuPjWvbgMojOymlB9zhjJq6SQcyW5SZ6Co5/M/jj9TmJRcOGlp t25XZc= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-sasl-enc :x-sasl-enc; s=smtpout; bh=/LfYpKKz82Nw7wShJmc3NsDrClA=; b=GILwj IqQA7iBX9yNivBibn6EGE4HGX50qd0jQxyNzrjqQYg0pCSTiKfZZONCWZijBdPH+ Lox/EUoHB9+Q328VrEiOFGrnbjpe8CRG7Z02dRg1n1VO6Rnc63BgOyPPwD1YVpiq 6cSQiG8VHomOMrSTDgsLwOkvTu20yS7RUAp2wk= X-Sasl-enc: LvpPcY1bH3Y3LJCpqFu03WkeSspyQ/gEyyxS6PuwpPED 1434247797 Received: from khazad-dum.debian.net (unknown [201.82.45.16]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id EE13B6800C2; Sat, 13 Jun 2015 22:09:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.khazad-dum.debian.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1C2F9016F3A; Sat, 13 Jun 2015 23:09:55 -0300 (BRT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at khazad-dum.debian.net Received: from khazad-dum.debian.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (khazad-dum2.khazad-dum.debian.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id T6TI73BO09ra; Sat, 13 Jun 2015 23:09:54 -0300 (BRT) Received: by khazad-dum.debian.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A7E929019C15; Sat, 13 Jun 2015 23:09:54 -0300 (BRT) Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2015 23:09:54 -0300 From: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh To: Mark Andrews Message-ID: <20150614020954.GA26753@khazad-dum.debian.net> References: <20150614002808.B297C309397F@rock.dv.isc.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150614002808.B297C309397F@rock.dv.isc.org> X-GPG-Fingerprint1: 4096R/39CB4807 C467 A717 507B BAFE D3C1 6092 0BD9 E811 39CB 4807 X-GPG-Fingerprint2: 1024D/1CDB0FE3 5422 5C61 F6B7 06FB 7E04 3738 EE25 DE3F 1CDB 0FE3 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Cc: bloat Subject: Re: [Bloat] Apple ECN, Bufferbloat, CoDel X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2015 02:10:28 -0000 On Sun, 14 Jun 2015, Mark Andrews wrote: > NAT64 and DNS64 need to die. There are much better solutions to > providing IPv4 over IPv6 than NAT64 and DNS64 and 464XLAT that grew > from NAT64 and DNS64. Please make it "NAT64 WITH DNS64 needs to die". It is too easy to forget that there is such a thing as NAT64-FE (RFC 7269). Fortunately, NAT64-FE is not used together with DNS64 in any remotely sane scenario, so it is not going to break DNSSEC. It is also a somewhat rare beast most of us never will have to deal with (I do, and it doesn't make me happy). -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh