That's right. We discussed this in the MASQUE meeting yesterday and the room seemed OK to have us add Pref64 to draft-ietf-masque-connect-ip-dns. We'll write a PR for it.
David
On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 3:00 PM Jen Linkova <furry13@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Good point Magnus, thank you for bringing it up!
I'm adding Yaroslav and David in Cc, as I was told by Yaroslav that
there are some plans to add PREF64 support to Connect-IP.
So I guess we are good.
On Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 11:20 PM <mohamed.boucadair@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Magnus,
>
> (Adding v6ops/authors to easily track this review)
>
>
>
> Thanks for the review and connecting the “dots”. A side note, the masque dns work you cited has to be connected to the DNR/IKE work done by the ADD/IPSECME WGs.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Med
>
>
>
> De : Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund=40ericsson.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Envoyé : mercredi 16 juillet 2025 14:24
> À : tsv-art@xxxxxxxx; last-call@xxxxxxxx
> Objet : [Last-Call] FW: [Masque] draft-ietf-v6ops-prefer8781-04 ietf last call Tsvart review
>
>
>
>
>
> Document: draft-ietf-v6ops-prefer8781
> Title: Recommendations for Discovering IPv6 Prefix Used for IPv6 Address
> Synthesis Reviewer: Magnus Westerlund Review result: Ready
>
> Having reviewed this document while going back to determine if I had made an
> error in triaging it for TSV-ART. I realized that I could send out my result
> and also inform Masque WG about a potential concern.
>
> So I think the document is ready for publication and have no obvious and
> significant transport impact. So I think no changes are needed.
>
> The one thought worth noting here between this document and activities in WIT
> area is how this idea interacts with Connect-IP HTTP tunneling done in MASQUE
> WG. It also indicates an general issue for Connect-IP, and which it is noting
> in Section 7.1 of RFC 9484 (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9484.html#name-link-operation). Namely that
> Connect-IP is not a link layer and doesn't have a way of carrying RAs. Thus,
> the pref64 info can't be carried currently. Instead it likely needs a dedicated
> extension, just like what is being done for configuring DNS: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-masque-connect-ip-dns/
>
>
> If the private IP network one is connecting to (with Connect-IP) is using NAT64
> and the IP endpoint needs the configuration it needs to get it from a DNS, and
> one that is associated with this network too. Which thus would require at least
> the above extension to work at all.
>
> I think the HTTP Tunneling properties are such that it's future and/or updated
> specs are the ones that should take note of this general recommendation, rather
> than the general recommendation needing to note the special case of Connect-IP.
>
> Cheers
>
>
>
> Magnus Westerlund
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
>
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.
--
Cheers, Jen Linkova
-- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
