Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile last call- "harmfully broad"?

Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> Tue, 17 February 2015 02:41 UTC

Return-Path: <lorenzo@google.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 6ACDA1A8983 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 18:41:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.388
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.388 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
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 uIctOsnv58XI for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 18:41:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ig0-x231.google.com (mail-ig0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF3B61A86EE for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 18:41:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ig0-f177.google.com with SMTP id z20so27079727igj.4 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 18:41:40 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=t6IMLzuGOjpKWOSd/1UdvNYeX4KZlbebN9lq84cmJOY=; b=pcIveRK702W0f6JVo6bquwrRgcaodrRUrSLoM3WHyGrjVKUem2Uus7JkhnpAKJzPaO YNdel2Qul5s1AlOcRzz7NJ9PJC2RfEmdwezlNVV2OkYjPaRc2/llSR3gHiQ1YgAtGVbE O7NYbb/jmVV7ubOi8swVlrhuJHG+8WanE43OqcCGNJgHBu+FCwBka6RGj/f47a4Ipbt1 Cwrx8uofcMAM70bkdxMxLA8W3Pmpw6XgEWAnR9VFFAI3ouf+FrvNHPLi5hv4lb4etFiZ bbA4DOloPaahmtD43czFHiO2B8j191KhEbazR9t5jjMBjxkgf9kyfGH48o94cEhzCkTJ TJNw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=t6IMLzuGOjpKWOSd/1UdvNYeX4KZlbebN9lq84cmJOY=; b=G1GT2O6A6Ag+Vs6zCSMTuWHJPrVUOFMiMPnXPW6UsL9jHgGrVZjKJRK7L+qeSUc0zM qmvywL312LXCIx3Cc6DBSGTdzO6I7xFuPoG7EFA3l9I+t7qwdtHQwwqE+yXjjkXgWOHs qmSMckW2FmhOcsrwGtcbvgNxdThfFOcHSQ9taim9kF/dnP1Hm7ARvrcdFIroMO+Dj0cn HRYnW8mueQVBtCWkKiI7+shO5Mw8078skbnD0eS8pXF38Tsfo88yav9v/stELHux7g3C gAsH2g1wLFVcE1AP9vbL0L/50O4oZpE42Mtl+CQ+1vybhh91Kk1AAGY2q3N9CVv/mYbi KiOw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmfrE/ZufkLC6zdttt5NrmNaiM7LWXtGpj+yOFWXv0C2jPsEHCvc7GzhBSQS1xoMv+u0Osy
X-Received: by 10.107.170.220 with SMTP id g89mr32808593ioj.31.1424140900200; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 18:41:40 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.64.33.104 with HTTP; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 18:41:19 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr0Zkic6-ydV-u==xjDGdY9GYWb8KwciBPnfk8zO=6FFqQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B9330049091C2@OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <CAKD1Yr2yDnwPDHgsq3Wi3UOzKY7KrqSpBMbBttJ5qAAu6ijOAw@mail.gmail.com> <54DDF02C.8020903@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E61130F231B4@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <6536E263028723489CCD5B6821D4B21303DEA706@UK30S005EXS06.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK> <CAKD1Yr0j23E-UMdL2Ujv5nrpbbUa9rgPE_6AhbHLn0JeOZ9Edg@mail.gmail.com> <355A1FFC-9F92-4D61-985D-4C5FC6EC69EC@eircom.net> <CAKD1Yr2PX81czTwUZzaMtgPc9vhvP=oL++UZByGzxmkq_B=DMA@mail.gmail.com> <6536E263028723489CCD5B6821D4B21303E07EE2@UK30S005EXS06.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK> <CAKD1Yr0Zkic6-ydV-u==xjDGdY9GYWb8KwciBPnfk8zO=6FFqQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 11:41:19 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKD1Yr0qS-Vg-XB7mNWwephkkL5rCG+NJO7uDJg_4W3LT+Q9Ew@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Heatley, Nick" <nick.heatley@ee.co.uk>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114159b87794e6050f3fa46d
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/0my5UjcWCCNPkaFzH0osp0eeYlk>
Cc: "IPv6 Ops WG \(v6ops@ietf.org\)" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile last call- "harmfully broad"?
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: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 02:41:57 -0000

On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:57 AM, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
wrote:

> Yes. Make IPv6* (see below) a requirement for carrier-branded devices, and
> give the OEMs a credible signal that from date X onwards, you *will* fail
> TA on every device that doesn't implement IPv6, and you *will not* waive
> the requirement. That's what Verizon and T-Mobile did, and it worked for
> them.
>

Also: if you think that this strategy is not feasible because you do not
have an IPv6 network yet, then yes, that's true - you can't make IPv6 a
device requirement until you have an IPv6 network.

But I think the key point here is that apart from the lack of 464xlat on
iOS, the mobile operating systems are a lot more ready for IPv6 than you
might think they are. Once the network is complete, I think turning on IPv6
in the devices does work. Orange Poland, Telenor, and SK Telecom should be
able to confirm.