IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [shara] Mobile Networks are already v6-ready. Really? (was RE: APLUSP minutes)

<mohamed.boucadair@orange-ftgroup.com> Mon, 07 December 2009 13:24 UTC

Return-Path: <mohamed.boucadair@orange-ftgroup.com>
X-Original-To: shara@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: shara@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DDB63A67BE for <shara@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Dec 2009 05:24:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.009
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.009 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.239, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HnbNtvPzbBFX for <shara@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Dec 2009 05:24:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relais-inet.francetelecom.com (relais-ias245.francetelecom.com [80.12.204.245]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D82A3A67B5 for <shara@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Dec 2009 05:24:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from omfeda07.si.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.200]) by omfeda13.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 7E6B51903CB; Mon, 7 Dec 2009 14:24:03 +0100 (CET)
Received: from PUEXCH41.nanterre.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.101.44.30]) by omfeda07.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 624EB15805C; Mon, 7 Dec 2009 14:24:02 +0100 (CET)
Received: from PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr ([10.101.44.14]) by PUEXCH41.nanterre.francetelecom.fr ([10.101.44.30]) with mapi; Mon, 7 Dec 2009 14:24:02 +0100
From: mohamed.boucadair@orange-ftgroup.com
To: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2009 14:24:01 +0100
Thread-Topic: [shara] Mobile Networks are already v6-ready. Really? (was RE: APLUSP minutes)
Thread-Index: Acp3PXplGyY7JubvSB6Mtl1iCe8PowAAe9ng
Message-ID: <17532_1260192242_4B1D01F2_17532_28997_1_94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F30EF2B00527@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr>
References: <038501ca7503$a726a5c0$5ba36b80@cisco.com> <17422_1260179351_4B1CCF97_17422_2272_1_94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F30EF2B003AD@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr> <4B1CFCA6.1050504@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
In-Reply-To: <4B1CFCA6.1050504@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Accept-Language: fr-FR
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: fr-FR
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-PMX-Version: 5.5.7.378829, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.376379, Antispam-Data: 2009.12.7.123329
Cc: "shara@ietf.org" <shara@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [shara] Mobile Networks are already v6-ready. Really? (was RE: APLUSP minutes)
X-BeenThere: shara@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Sharing of an IPv4 Address discussion list <shara.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/shara>, <mailto:shara-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/shara>
List-Post: <mailto:shara@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:shara-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/shara>, <mailto:shara-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2009 13:24:15 -0000

Dear all,

I fully disagree with this statement. 

A+P is not a replacement to IPv6. A+P is only an intermediary step for us to ease and encourage IPv6 migration to solve the problems we have.

Maintaining an A+P world with no exit strategy to IPv6 means that the issues described in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ford-shared-addressing-issues-01 will be for ever there. This is not our position...

Cheers,
Med

-----Message d'origine-----
De : Masataka Ohta [mailto:mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp] 
Envoyé : lundi 7 décembre 2009 14:01
À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed NCPI/NAD/TIP
Cc : shara@ietf.org
Objet : Re: [shara] Mobile Networks are already v6-ready. Really? (was RE: APLUSP minutes)

mohamed.boucadair@orange-ftgroup.com wrote:
 
> Why should IETF exclude a+p from the IPv6 migration toolkit? 

Because A+P makes IPv6 totally unnecessary.

We should remove the curse of IPv6, at least from the rest of the
world.

						Masataka Ohta


*********************************
This message and any attachments (the "message") are confidential and intended solely for the addressees. 
Any unauthorised use or dissemination is prohibited.
Messages are susceptible to alteration. 
France Telecom Group shall not be liable for the message if altered, changed or falsified.
If you are not the intended addressee of this message, please cancel it immediately and inform the sender.
********************************

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email