Re: [v4tov6transition] [Softwires] ISP support of Native IPv6across NAT44 CPEs -Proposed 6a44 Specification

Yiu, 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: softwires-bounces@ietf.org 
> [mailto:softwires-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Yiu L. Lee
> Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 11:36 AM
> To: Brian E Carpenter; Ole Troan
> Cc: Softwires; v4tov6transition@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Softwires] [v4tov6transition] ISP support of 
> Native IPv6across NAT44 CPEs -Proposed 6a44 Specification
> 
> Hi Brian,
> 
> I think this is all relative. I discussed internally about software
> download. Their answer to me is "BIG NO". Reason is SP must 
> run QA tests for
> every possible OS/patches combination. Worst is we need to 
> redo this again
> when a new patch/upgrade is released. This is far costly than you can
> imagine (way more than the $80 new CPE). In the end, I would 
> vote for the
> dongle based over host based anytime.
> 
> Is dongle more viable option than new CPE? I think this is 
> the real debate.

But then the dongle/CPE becomes the ball-and-chain that
locks the customer into the SP's PA addressing scheme...

Fred
fred.l.templin@boeing.com 

> Cheers,
> Yiu
> 
> 
> On 10/7/10 6:47 PM, "Brian E Carpenter" 
> <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Softwires mailing list
> Softwires@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
> 