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

Lorenzo Colitti <> Tue, 24 November 2020 13:01 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21FD73A0C22 for <>; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 05:01:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.699
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5VvUd-6vY34c for <>; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 05:01:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72AC83A0C1B for <>; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 05:01:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id u21so21797024iol.12 for <>; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 05:01:28 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=1ky761iqfPa8hMPTiFl2+LyZCJMd4bIvSZ7Fphr+7s0=; b=mWZB2LEPD/YICYPPN0Ki9e4nbawungIwtSHxjXB6AWfh5+5gMz+13z4mdySDsjkExR HG+Ni2R+L7gwnrrM0ntlZ1Gq5CbXTQWj9MGJvj9+nwbKnhh1awGfpcSFTASRrzjY82ye RZbNzuzxttNXSwM0ZIbR3NzMFLZswwQygZMF0/OASvO/63kGM18YzEQXCVG5piH5PMKy D/NAw/uQYLwj2Hd9W9MAVoI2CK9kSojcsSu3K52FSheaK8PWWVck+6K1TonQVq9twqdb vqoWQ3OLcQ9I56pecqW/FuOjVEjPa28ITw7kG26D0SMAY/ZyeR5D4QJtmpwgZWuuHQ/A CK7g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=1ky761iqfPa8hMPTiFl2+LyZCJMd4bIvSZ7Fphr+7s0=; b=QGwoMO2g2z8V1rYxqFi4Xvtne1XStxM7NJHoibFB8LaSqb/1UYWPbTxQ0azDU1JVtH E3UWDEjj96+OVIbxWBzfY6Papoe++y5KogyQAowf80GUkjdLq8xcdk5paMxUkPCyT1U6 zQIihzfZFmp3cDbl9/FfPVtOyP1OHGDCRYdxh1BvyoLCv60TxnXalBkdRPeoWvJAIJV0 oFxv0u6zcQDNslaVHMYrZq8rxZeocLILzkFcbBxJJBCrt4/o8wNxeVDAz5DqlkHgNQ/C c8w7jvirJtvSYpyh7AHJiYIpS3UC9CfajQmz6bwdSXXEBRVQbB7TeAOzRVewbANmissT jaOQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531sbL1GbkYVRhf31iXVBj79Gi1fhBp8Uj3870c2Ct6IF6yNi7I2 oTt9UTwU8HCIZw4ZfRmEiLRbOizpaajQy89O96uzaw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxs7h72F1/eSfMB3p5aKQQUgF0T++3wq0Ro03uPm+8sQ/w0ewt1d8Y7x2Z1nxarwwsj1tiitIMIQTcU4b2k0ZQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a6b:d801:: with SMTP id y1mr3800674iob.61.1606222887501; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 05:01:27 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <>
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 22:01:16 +0900
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] How do you solve 3GPP issue if neither operator nor handset supports PD?
To: Philip Homburg <>, Cameron Byrne <>, Gyan Mishra <>
Cc: " WG" <>, 6MAN <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a4643105b4d9e829"
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:01:30 -0000

On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 8:56 PM Philip Homburg <>

> Is there any guarantee that the mobile world will implement this new option
> or will we be back here in a couple of years with the same discussion?
> I.e.,
> if we do a new option when will it be part of 3GPP specs, when will routers
> support it, when will telco's update routers and roll out this feature.
> When
> will handset support it, etc.

As for handset support: as I said, at least on Android such an option would
be easier to implement than DHCPv6 PD.

I don't know how easy it would be to get it into 3GPP implementations. +Cameron
Byrne <> +Gyan Mishra <>om>, do you
know? Is such a new RA option something that could happen via a feature
request to 3GPP equipment vendors, or would it require a year-long process
of revving the 3GPP specs and waiting for vendors to pick up the new 3GPP