Re: [v6ops] reclassify 464XLAT as standard instead of info

My guess, didn't tired that, is that if and implementation is using both DHCPv6-PD and 64share, it should be possible to have a single APN. You just need to not “force” the use of the PD if is not being requested by the UE. Is a quick though, but don't see a problem on that.

By the way, if the operator was having problems with DHCPv6-PD, it means that the chipset was not filtering that as you indicated before, so blame some chipset vendors, not the IETF.

I also see a valid case for having 2 APNs. 1) for LTE broadband routers that require more than a /64 (and thus DHCPv6-PD), and 2) for the rest that are regular UEs and only require a /64 (64share for the tethering)

Regards,
Jordi

-----Mensaje original-----
De: v6ops <v6ops-bounces@ietf.org> en nombre de Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Responder a: <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Fecha: jueves, 21 de septiembre de 2017, 8:11
Para: <v6ops@ietf.org>
Asunto: Re: [v6ops] reclassify 464XLAT as standard instead of info

    Le 21/09/2017 à 13:03, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ a écrit :
    > DHCPv6-PD is a good thing to have. I’ve confronted thoughts on DHCPv6
    > vs SLAAC … However, I understand it will be nice to have DHCPv6
    > implemented everywhere, as for example enterprise environments prefer
    > a more controlled environment.
    > 
    > However, having DHCPv6 doesn’t exclude having 64share as well.

    It does: try to run both on a computer and you will see.

    In practice: a particular operator had to make some choice some time. 
    That choice led to either 64share on an APN, or DHCPv6-PD on another 
    APN.  They had some reason to put each such thing on a distinct APN.

    It's not simply a matter of having two distinct RFCs.  I can live with 
    thousands of RFCs if you wish.  But I cant live with different APN each 
    for an RFC.

    I dont want a Connection Management software to switch between APNs like 
    that.

    I am not sure whether I explain this ok, but that's the way it is.

    > Otherwise, if we follow your suggestion, we should cleanup 60-70% of
    > the protocols that we have, because they are redundant.

    In this discussion we talk 64share and DHCPv6-PD.  Pick one.

    (for the other 60-70% protocols in MIB we can discuss separately if you 
    wish).

    Alex

    > 
    > Regards, Jordi
    > 
    > 
    > -----Mensaje original----- De: v6ops <v6ops-bounces@ietf.org> en
    > nombre de Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> Responder
    > a: <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> Fecha: jueves, 21 de septiembre de
    > 2017, 7:57 Para: <v6ops@ietf.org> Asunto: Re: [v6ops] reclassify
    > 464XLAT as standard instead of info
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > Le 21/09/2017 à 12:33, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ a écrit :
    >> Yes, why not?
    > 
    > Because DHCPv6-PD does that.
    > 
    > Alex
    > 
    >> 
    >> Regards, Jordi
    >> 
    >> 
    >> -----Mensaje original----- De: v6ops <v6ops-bounces@ietf.org> en
    >> nombre de Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> 
    >> Responder a: <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> Fecha: jueves, 21 de
    >> septiembre de 2017, 5:35 Para: Mikael Abrahamsson
    >> <swmike@swm.pp.se> CC: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" <v6ops@ietf.org> Asunto:
    >> Re: [v6ops] reclassify 464XLAT as standard instead of info
    >> 
    >> 
    >> 
    >> Le 21/09/2017 à 10:31, Mikael Abrahamsson a écrit :
    >>> On Thu, 21 Sep 2017, Alexandre Petrescu wrote:
    >>> 
    >>>> I am not sure how the tethered clients will have end-to-end
    >>>> IPv6 if they dont have a prefix dedicated to them.  Or maybe do
    >>>> you propose that to be 64share?
    >>> 
    >>> That's what android already does, and have done for years.
    >>> Probably Apple iOS devices as well. RFC7278.
    >> 
    >> So you propose moving 64share to BCP as well?
    >> 
    >> Alex
    >> 
    >>> 
    >> 
    >> _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list 
    >> v6ops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
    >> 
    >> 
    >> 
    >> 
    >> ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you
    >> ready for the new Internet ? http://www.consulintel.es The IPv6
    >> Company
    >> 
    >> This electronic message contains information which may be
    >> privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for
    >> the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further
    >> non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use
    >> of the contents of this information, even if partially, including
    >> attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a
    >> criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware
    >> that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents
    >> of this information, even if partially, including attached files,
    >> is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so
    >> you must reply to the original sender to inform about this
    >> communication and delete it.
    >> 
    >> 
    >> 
    >> _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list 
    >> v6ops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
    >> 
    > 
    > _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list 
    > v6ops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you
    > ready for the new Internet ? http://www.consulintel.es The IPv6
    > Company
    > 
    > This electronic message contains information which may be privileged
    > or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive
    > use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty
    > authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents
    > of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is
    > strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you
    > are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying,
    > distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if
    > partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be
    > considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original
    > sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list 
    > v6ops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
    > 

    _______________________________________________
    v6ops mailing list
    v6ops@ietf.org
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.