Re: [v6ops] How do you solve 3GPP issue if neither operator nor handset supports PD?

[[e-mail]]

Philip,

>> Can you please write a draft explaining how it is supposed to work?
>> And if it is true as you say that it is currently implemented and
>> deployed, what implementations support that, how do the topologies
>> look like etc? I work for a reasonably large vendor I can guarantee
>> you that we have not implemented support for ephemeral addressing.
>> ;-)
> 
> Maybe we are talking about different things.
> 
> What I'm talking about if that applications on phones keep working even if
> the phone witch between mobile and wifi connections or moves from one
> wifi to the next.
> 
> Similarly laptops can move from one wifi to the next. VM running on a laptop
> can be taken from one wifi to the next and keep working, etc.
> 
> Nobody expects to reboot a phone or laptop just because you connect to another
> wifi. In the case of the VMs running on my laptop, they are bridged, so they
> pick up new addresses even though there connections stay up.
> 
> Now the question is we can also make this work for prefixes. Can I give
> my VMs a separate prefix and expect that to be updated as I move around.
> 
> If vendors of network equipment don't care about this, then there is always
> IPv4 and NAT. Or maybe IPv6 and NAT.

For the case you cite IPv4 NAT would work equally well.

This started with a discussion how to support multiple links (i.e. more than a single /64).
We are the IETF and have a responsibility to solve the general problem.
A site with an arbitrary topology. Can you now please describe your solution?

Best regards,
Ole