Re: [v4tov6transition] [Softwires] ISP support of Native IPv6 across NAT44 CPEs -Proposed 6a44 Specification

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

Ole,

> I really liked the dongle idea by the way.

I'm not convinced. If people are willing to buy such a thing,
and if you are correct about $80 IPv6-enabled CPEs, I think the
latter will win.

So the real question for me is whether a $0 dollar download will beat
an $80 purchase. Predicting customer bahaviour is hard.

IMHO, we can put both on the market and see what happens.

Regards
   Brian

On 2010-10-08 08:28, Ole Troan wrote:
> Remi,
> 
> [...]
> 
>> ISPs that aren't concerned with what their customer would like to have will eventually face competition.
> 
> we are in complete agreement of the end goal. it is just how we get there...
> 
>> A key point is that supporting 6a44 is very inexpensive compared to other supports they have to envisage.
>>
>> Yet, as Yiu says, this still depends on which hosts will support 6a44.
>> My personal hope is that we will soon see trials, including with mobile phones.  
> 
> issues I have with host tunneling:
>  - how to communicate with native IPv6 nodes on the same network?
>  - how to communicate to another 6a44 host on a different link in the same home?
>  - do you need non-congruent topology multi-homing policy?
>    http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-troan-multihoming-without-nat66-01
>    how do you distribute that policy when you don't have a on-link router?
>  - a general unease that now every host is supposed to have a "VPN" connection?
>    how do I configure my own firewall and other network border policy?
> 
> how much would a new CPE cost the customer? 80USD? that's only 5 pints of beer (if bought in Norway.)
> I really liked the dongle idea by the way. perhaps with a L2TP LAC.
> 
> cheers,
> Ole