IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Operational Consensus on deployment

"Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke@cisco.com> Fri, 08 August 2014 12:12 UTC

Return-Path: <evyncke@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DDE81B2A86 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Aug 2014 05:12:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.501
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id V2RDLE9oLJm2 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Aug 2014 05:12:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-1.cisco.com (alln-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.142.88]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A92D1B2A94 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Aug 2014 05:11:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2311; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1407499912; x=1408709512; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=WSeUjLIXjC9NcbKMEgcOUg9qWwL5svT7nAJ0e8rnhRs=; b=bsaOfvkOCdpSwl5EE0KvKb05XmR61nWI/fRZ+DmCwFR6u6M38idW+PDI maLVb3FZE4eV23EoTqAXBpug3za8S0bn5cE2deOVjkkMQNotJjj9e/fL8 24f/SXWK/Wk6T4M3grm22O6K7ZSAeg6dQ0H3IDvYZ2oQlGexeX0qSmqo+ s=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhUFAHO95FOtJV2a/2dsb2JhbABagkcjI4EpBNQxAYEWFneEBAEBBHkQAgEIBAEQKgcyFBECBA4FFogsAcVOF49MB4RLBYUAAowSixGUcoNXbIFG
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.01,824,1400025600"; d="scan'208,217"; a="67552891"
Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by alln-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Aug 2014 12:11:51 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x10.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x10.cisco.com [173.36.12.84]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s78CBopw003342 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 8 Aug 2014 12:11:50 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com ([fe80::8c1c:7b85:56de:ffd1]) by xhc-aln-x10.cisco.com ([173.36.12.84]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Fri, 8 Aug 2014 07:11:50 -0500
From: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke@cisco.com>
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] Operational Consensus on deployment
Thread-Index: AQHPsATuKp4cYlfWs0iK+WcgE96R8pvBHf4AgAAE0QCAABWsAIAD4cnggABacICAAAG1AIABosKA
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2014 12:11:49 +0000
Message-ID: <D00A8AFF.26D18%evyncke@cisco.com>
References: <DE860EBC-171E-46E7-A3B6-5E8B79A453CC@cisco.com> <53DFEC6C.3010707@gmail.com> <CAD6AjGRUWxT5XiNxMi_S5VgYtGMLb_FVHXN-ZfGpcY=geix15g@mail.gmail.com> <53E06AC9.9010908@fud.no> <4F7D76F6-BD81-453B-94DC-A3C3DFF68505@delong.com> <8600C096-37D0-4651-92C1-BCFDBA674433@nominum.com> <CAD6AjGTBfyT-zNDJtBKCNtRxd=Hi07678Sr_-HgSGYbjAiF3Tg@mail.gmail.com> <C5281716-DC04-42E6-AC82-0D53E5DA0284@nominum.com> <53E1236A.605@fud.no> <m1XEkJJ-0000BuC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <20140805195402.GO51793@Space.Net> <m1XElwg-0000BbC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <D00834AF.68B6C%Lee@asgard.org> <CAD6AjGQJ3PXpGkk9Cd4d-MhExZ9QrpiseyAqPqmpXzQ-HCyDwQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr2=dMg6sua+9v28t173TQVYet6pDU7Xv6RWkbGjqA1ziA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr2=dMg6sua+9v28t173TQVYet6pDU7Xv6RWkbGjqA1ziA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.3.140616
x-originating-ip: [10.55.185.76]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D00A8AFF26D18evynckeciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/03IYO01Qu56b9CgQ6Co5oosKy68
Cc: IPv6 Ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Operational Consensus on deployment
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2014 12:12:03 -0000

Lorenzo

For my education, do you have a pointer for a data point on:

From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com<mailto:lorenzo@google.com>>
A 4G handset with 464xlat will have ~50% of traffic native IPv6, ~45% NAT64, and ~5% 464xlat. 464 conversion is lossy and brittle, but if it's only used for 5% of traffic, then the operator might just say, "Who cares? I don't; and if somebody else does, they're free to use IPv6."

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email