Re: [Softwires] introduction and endorsement for MAP

[John Berg <[e-mail]>]

Thank you Suresh and others who have responded to my inquiry.  This is
very good news and I am happy to hear these will become RFCs soon.  MAP is
being viewed as the most favorable solution for IPv4/IPv6 co-existence by
operators who have deployed extensive IPv6 only networks.  The benefit of
this technology is a great step to move the industry forward.

Best Regards,

John Berg

CableLabs
Lead Engineer ­ Network Technologies
858 Coal Creek Circle
Louisville, CO  80027
303 661-3882




On 6/29/15 11:02 PM, "Suresh Krishnan" <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>Hi John,
>   Thanks for sharing your experiences. It is great to hear market
>feedback for these specs. As Rajiv and Mark pointed out, these documents
>are on the verge of becoming RFCs. In fact, as of today they entered the
>AUTH48 state which means they will hopefully be published in a matter of
>days rather than weeks. I will keep you posted once the documents are
>published.
>
>Thanks
>Suresh
>
>On 06/18/2015 06:41 PM, John Berg wrote:
>> This is my first time posting to the Softwires mailing list and I would
>> like to introduce myself, John Berg, Lead Engineer supporting emerging
>> network technologies projects for CableLabs.  I have been a long term
>> proponent for migration to IPv6 and a long time follower of drafts
>> coming out of this working group, even if this is my first time posting
>> here.  A lot of good work has come out of this group over the years, and
>> a lot of the substance of this work has helped form the standards in
>> many CableLabs specifications.  So, I hope to continue to learn from and
>> contribute to this working group going forward.
>>
>> My purpose in writing to the mailing list today was to draw attention to
>> some of the work being done around co-existence technologies,
>> particularly MAP-E and MAP-T.  Over the last several years I have seen
>> great progress made by several of our member organizations in the
>> migration to IPv6 only networks.  It has also been clear that IPv6
>> network evolution has outpaced the adoption of IPv6 in home networks,
>> particularly in the various CPE products that would be attached to them.
>>   There is no question that this has bogged down the efforts of
>> operators to migrate to full end to end IPv6 networks.
>>
>> In the past year or so, another thing that has become clear is the need
>> to continue to co-exist with IPv4 only devices in the home network.
>>   IPv4 exhaustion set aside, there is a clear and imminent need to
>> accommodate IPv4 only capable devices in IPv6 only networks.  In fact,
>> several MSOs have come to us asking that we help define new standards
>> that will make IPv4/IPv6 co-existence possible, particularly in customer
>> edge devices such as home routers and eRouters.  These new standards
>> must avoid the pitfalls of earlier co-existence technologies that
>> introduced a potential for impacting the user experience.  Enter MAP-E
>> and MAP-T as viable and scalable solutions to this problem.
>>
>> CableLabs, with the input of our member organizations, is now
>> aggressively adding requirements to our eRouter specification for MAP-E
>> and MAP-T.  These technologies are viewed as being the quick and near
>> term solution to IPv4/IPv6 co-existence, and the hope is that they can
>> be adopted quickly and in a manner that is seamless to the subscriber.
>>   But although the substance of the MAP IETF draft documents is solid,
>> we find ourselves writing requirements against the current versions of
>> the drafts and not the RFCs.
>>
>> Given the urgency with which operators would like to deploy MAP as a
>> solution for IPv4/IPv6 co-existence, CableLabs respectfully requests the
>> Softwires working group to advance the IETF drafts for MAP to RFC status
>> as quickly as possible.  In particular, MAP-E, MAP-T, and MAP DHCP IETF
>> drafts are extremely relevant to defining requirements for edge devices
>> and operator deployment strategies.  We feel that RFC versions of these
>> standards would lead to more stable implementations of MAP in vendor
>> products, and the potential for new or shifting requirements would be
>> greatly reduced or eliminated.
>>
>> Thank you in advance for your consideration of my observations and
>> requests, and I will look forward to my future interaction with this
>> working group.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> John Berg
>> CableLabs
>> Lead Engineer ­ Network Technologies
>> 858 Coal Creek Circle
>> Louisville, CO  80027
>> 303 661-3882
>