Re: [Softwires] Stateless implementation plan

Maoke <fibrib@gmail.com> Tue, 07 February 2012 15:15 UTC

Return-Path: <fibrib@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9395921F85EE for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Feb 2012 07:15:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.448
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.448 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jQsLQOA5nOal for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Feb 2012 07:15:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qw0-f44.google.com (mail-qw0-f44.google.com [209.85.216.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E363421F841D for <softwires@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Feb 2012 07:15:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: by qafi29 with SMTP id i29so2746373qaf.10 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Tue, 07 Feb 2012 07:15:50 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=OsbzaCS7GihO8ObnHDvd9kXppNojFkmbhBhySpYOhh0=; b=qhOlO+tv9MWZ5s+cosTkW1At9AugB3lKoP66MJAyJLIWm60E1UBM6oVVV8WuH4wZXT iVMIgN9mnlHt2c3+LbU3uUqBrUTW8Kqx2xdObpgykhfvqes4TyxlGC2fvQqNJ0XGZZQk cq/XRal0Bieaq6/HbYMkDmCI3kXQHskc2chbY=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.224.183.201 with SMTP id ch9mr19632854qab.22.1328627750470; Tue, 07 Feb 2012 07:15:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.229.11.144 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Feb 2012 07:15:50 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAD6AjGS7TBhUVJjwjqMibXJRo1Y=F4UKcDmYXfh-9OUDe=Me0w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAD6AjGTfQ4akndGG3C9k7SZU=4BpuA4qrorg1FeV5u8wEJRdaA@mail.gmail.com> <CAD6AjGS7TBhUVJjwjqMibXJRo1Y=F4UKcDmYXfh-9OUDe=Me0w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 00:15:50 +0900
Message-ID: <CAFUBMqUTXyL=46zShbK2dZ8cLjs40WXn9sB8aH1fYqUGhsMjwQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Maoke <fibrib@gmail.com>
To: Cameron Byrne <cb.list6@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf303b402d1b050304b861418c
Cc: softwires@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Softwires] Stateless implementation plan
X-BeenThere: softwires@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: softwires wg discussion list <softwires.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/softwires>
List-Post: <mailto:softwires@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2012 15:15:51 -0000

just my personal humble understanding:

basically MAP or 4rd, as it is named, is designed for residual deployment,
i.e., using not-yet-allocated or already-recalled ipv4 addresses for the
ipv4 access of ipv6-enabled networks. its address mapping logic implies
doing the ipv6 address planning as the first step, independent of ipv4.

for the transition of existing ipv4 network without renumbering (or only
renumbering to ipv4-translatable ipv6 addresses), MAP is also applicable
but the operator should pay much attention to the addressing issue. in such
a case, RFC6052/RFC6145 suite is a little better recommended.
- maoke
2012/2/8 Cameron Byrne <cb.list6@gmail.com>

> Are the map and 4rd solutions deployable for existing networks that do not
> have reserves  of ipv4 ?  My assumption is that these solutions target
> existing networks that have meaningful growth and they need a v6 solution.
>
> If yes, how? Any pointers within the reams of drafts I should look for?
>
> In my brief and simple skimming, it appears to me that setting up one of
> these solutions would require me to collapse my existing network to harvest
> back the addresses so that they may be redeployed in map.
>
> What would the deployment process be for an address exhausted network of
> 10 million subs with 10% annual growth be?
>
> Cb
>
> _______________________________________________
> Softwires mailing list
> Softwires@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
>
>