IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Time to dump dual-stack networks and get on the IPv6 train - with LW4o6

Philip Homburg <pch-v6ops-8@u-1.phicoh.com> Mon, 02 July 2018 09:56 UTC

Return-Path: <pch-bCE2691D2@u-1.phicoh.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C30BE130E34 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 02:56:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 76FGiXRWYYo9 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 02:56:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (stereo6-tun.hq.phicoh.net [IPv6:2001:888:1044:10:2a0:c9ff:fe9f:17a9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB9A8130E06 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 02:56:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (localhost [::ffff:127.0.0.1]) by stereo.hq.phicoh.net with esmtp (TLS version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) (Smail #157) id m1fZvZj-0000GnC; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 11:56:51 +0200
Message-Id: <m1fZvZj-0000GnC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
To: v6ops@ietf.org
From: Philip Homburg <pch-v6ops-8@u-1.phicoh.com>
Sender: pch-bCE2691D2@u-1.phicoh.com
References: <057742AA-226E-44F8-819E-C865D7F58758@gmail.com> <c29a04f9-488d-62a9-29c6-35fce8920edd@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr3cu-V7gVMxcVL1hXgvkJPX2N+bC9QJq+fcApyLOPyeWQ@mail.gmail.com> <0b378e30-bbef-0b59-866a-103353225256@gmail.com>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 2 Jul 2018 16:20:39 +1200 ." <0b378e30-bbef-0b59-866a-103353225256@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 11:56:50 +0200
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/7yahcPzQd3EkA4j3LpNXaho4ye0>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Time to dump dual-stack networks and get on the IPv6 train - with LW4o6
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 09:56:56 -0000

>>>From a pure network operations perspective, dual-stack is rarely the best
>> solution. It is much cheaper and operationally simpler to support only IPv6
>> in the network and run IPv4 on top of it.
>
>I doubt that this generalisation is true everywhere, and what happens inside
>the network and what is presented to the transport layer in the host are two
>different things. As long as it *looks* like a dual stack at the socket API,
>that's fine.

There are plenty of ISPs that offer one or even multiple static IPv4 addresses
to customers and where customers are using those to run services locally.

As far as I know there are no RFCs that describe how to run such a setup
with IPv4 as a service. But maybe I missed something.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email