[v4tov6transition] IPv4 Residual Deployment across IPv6-Service networks (4rd)

Rémi Després <remi.despres@free.fr> Tue, 19 October 2010 07:31 UTC

Return-Path: <remi.despres@free.fr>
X-Original-To: v4tov6transition@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v4tov6transition@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B65073A6C3C; Tue, 19 Oct 2010 00:31:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.118
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.118 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.231, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, J_CHICKENPOX_31=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
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 oMWW12-+HrgV; Tue, 19 Oct 2010 00:31:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp21.services.sfr.fr (smtp21.services.sfr.fr [93.17.128.4]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5E583A69A1; Tue, 19 Oct 2010 00:30:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from filter.sfr.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by msfrf2117.sfr.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id EACE67000089; Tue, 19 Oct 2010 09:32:05 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.0.20] (per92-10-88-166-221-144.fbx.proxad.net [88.166.221.144]) by msfrf2117.sfr.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id ACAA37000087; Tue, 19 Oct 2010 09:32:05 +0200 (CEST)
X-SFR-UUID: 20101019073205707.ACAA37000087@msfrf2117.sfr.fr
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?R=E9mi_Despr=E9s?= <remi.despres@free.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 09:32:03 +0200
Message-Id: <EE8EB59E-CD5F-4353-91B3-5291535C9994@free.fr>
To: Softwires <softwires@ietf.org>, v4tov6transition <v4tov6transition@ietf.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081)
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081)
Subject: [v4tov6transition] IPv4 Residual Deployment across IPv6-Service networks (4rd)
X-BeenThere: v4tov6transition@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <v4tov6transition.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v4tov6transition>, <mailto:v4tov6transition-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v4tov6transition>
List-Post: <mailto:v4tov6transition@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v4tov6transition-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v4tov6transition>, <mailto:v4tov6transition-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 07:31:58 -0000

Hi, all,

FYI, the new draft on 4rd has jus been posted.
It is available at tools.ietf.org/html/draft-despres-softwire-4rd-00.

Comments most welcome.

RD






Internet Engineering Task Force                               R. Despres
Internet-Draft                                                 RD-IPtech
Intended status: Standards Track                        October 18, 2010
Expires: April 21, 2011


      IPv4 Residual Deployment across IPv6-Service networks (4rd)
                          A NAT-less solution
                     draft-despres-softwire-4rd-00

Abstract

   During the long transition period from IPv4-only to IPv6-only,
   networks will have not only to deploy the IPv6 service but also to
   maintain some IPv4 connectivity for a number of customers, and this
   for both outgoing and incoming connections and for both customer-
   individual and shared IPv4 addresses.  The 4rd solution (IPv4
   Residual Deployment) is designed as a lightweight solution for this.
   It applies not only to ISPs have IPv6-only routing networks, but also
   to those that, during early transition stages, have IPv4-only
   routing, with 6rd to offer the IPv6 service, those that have dual-
   stack routing networks but with private IPv4 addresses assigned to
   customers.

   In some scenarios, 4rd can dispense ISPs from supporting any NAT in
   their infrastructures.  In some others it can be used in parallel
   with NAT-based solutions such as DS-lite and/or NAT64/DNS4 which
   achieve better IPv4-address sharing ratios (but at a price of
   significantly higher operational complexity).

...

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Definitions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  Applicability  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   4.  The 4rd Protocol Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     4.1.  Mapping Rules  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     4.2.  Packet Encapsulations/Decapsulations . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     4.3.  Port sets of IPv4r prefixes longer than /32  . . . . . . . 10
     4.4.  PMTU Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
     4.5.  Parameter Acquisitions by 4rd Clients  . . . . . . . . . . 12
   5.  Example with IPv6-only Routing and Shared IPv4 Addresses . . . 14
   6.  Security considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
   7.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
   8.  Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
   9.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
     9.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
     9.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
   Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18