IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] discussion of transition technologies

<nick.heatley@bt.com> Wed, 24 January 2018 16:57 UTC

Return-Path: <nick.heatley@bt.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 BB63A126DCA for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 08:57:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.62
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.62 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=btgroupcloud.onmicrosoft.com
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 f08jO5-Q8bxd for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 08:57:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpe1.intersmtp.com (smtpe1.intersmtp.com [62.239.224.236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E956C124235 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 08:57:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from EVMHT64-UKRD.domain1.systemhost.net (10.36.3.101) by RDW083A007ED63.bt.com (10.187.98.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.319.2; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 16:57:12 +0000
Received: from smtpe1.intersmtp.com (10.187.98.10) by EVMHT64-UKRD.domain1.systemhost.net (10.36.3.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.342.0; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 16:57:08 +0000
Received: from EUR01-VE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (213.199.154.243) by smtpe1.intersmtp.com (62.239.224.234) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.319.2; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 16:57:06 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=BTGroupCloud.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-bt-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=a4nHe8HtSgOJwVzEY9WMFf597S/vbWEZQh3O6d2dN3A=; b=xGlsMCYnnlRxBHLM45eVR3edvVRzxkD28ntUGf5CQstl4ixvwDRsEEIIPH8CvzyT01vyhzqchJq3Y5N6X66yMQxz6g3GtNLxteRbqP7GVbzVcpaNIGbtpMqHejtPF0PZGtvRb6TdM1Et94e7umZT03JvEFwfKDN+ko9kgnPbXu0=
Received: from LO1P123MB0116.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (10.167.24.147) by LO1P123MB0115.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (10.167.24.146) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P256) id 15.20.428.17; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 16:57:06 +0000
Received: from LO1P123MB0116.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([10.167.24.147]) by LO1P123MB0116.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([10.167.24.147]) with mapi id 15.20.0428.024; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 16:57:06 +0000
From: nick.heatley@bt.com
To: lee@asgard.org, v6ops@ietf.org
Thread-Topic: discussion of transition technologies
Thread-Index: AQHTkWJf+dx5S2H5Hkq5X9wPAq1lEKODRPdw
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 16:57:06 +0000
Message-ID: <LO1P123MB0116C873308B5DA308EBC60AEAE20@LO1P123MB0116.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
References: <D687BC24.92CC1%lee@asgard.org>
In-Reply-To: <D687BC24.92CC1%lee@asgard.org>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=nick.heatley@bt.com;
x-originating-ip: [77.97.239.204]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; LO1P123MB0115; 7:/4xKC8PQowas7TkLq1bkVkPVNokxI2SoCp85lWOOBj2bDbxG1TcgPBFzKSIrXIcBdZIR1b7KGQt5RjocPvmDcIGbkPxzBzCfhBTsUd/8hk8SZxCr+ubFNPHxK6czjd5ohhrqCCbRvHR5CsJonXSLRAr7PbW92N2NOxbdsZlI0jV2AuJ8sCgUA4pq2d9MMTesPA7Y1SdjYxQxdaMPy86xWsMWeTGtp5I01oIlirmAS+HvQISaLjx8GB26omY56QNK
x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SSOS;
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: c75941ae-45ae-4136-41fd-08d5634b7ff9
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(7020095)(4652020)(4534165)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(5600026)(4604075)(3008032)(2017052603307)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:LO1P123MB0115;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: LO1P123MB0115:
x-antispam-2: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <LO1P123MB0115031662A602399EAF7BA8EAE20@LO1P123MB0115.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(28532068793085)(211936372134217)(100405760836317)(21748063052155)(119230021023882);
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040501)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(3231023)(2400081)(944501161)(93006095)(93001095)(10201501046)(3002001)(6041288)(20161123558120)(20161123564045)(20161123560045)(201703131423095)(201702281528075)(20161123555045)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(20161123562045)(6072148)(201708071742011); SRVR:LO1P123MB0115; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:LO1P123MB0115;
x-forefront-prvs: 056297E276
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(396003)(366004)(39860400002)(346002)(376002)(39380400002)(189003)(199004)(790700001)(6306002)(33656002)(55016002)(2501003)(105586002)(77096007)(6436002)(102836004)(6246003)(229853002)(3480700004)(54896002)(8936002)(9686003)(410100003)(110136005)(316002)(81156014)(236005)(5660300001)(8676002)(966005)(68736007)(606006)(6506007)(53546011)(14454004)(53936002)(3660700001)(26005)(99286004)(7736002)(97736004)(59450400001)(106356001)(81166006)(478600001)(2900100001)(2950100002)(74316002)(76176011)(3846002)(7696005)(6116002)(3280700002)(2906002)(66066001)(86362001)(25786009)(15940465004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:LO1P123MB0115; H:LO1P123MB0116.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: bt.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: D6Fl5VW5fmzya8Uik698OUiUV0XY91VmTQ1uufvrJ72/GH8ZgNivr+x/IcMWdqoVLG9oEZ5+9XB0CiRYYgHbbQ==
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_LO1P123MB0116C873308B5DA308EBC60AEAE20LO1P123MB0116GBRP_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: c75941ae-45ae-4136-41fd-08d5634b7ff9
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 24 Jan 2018 16:57:06.2438 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: a7f35688-9c00-4d5e-ba41-29f146377ab0
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: LO1P123MB0115
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/8H2LUaxrQUpTR_IncDnhsxV62jg>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] discussion of transition technologies
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 16:57:16 -0000

Hi Lee/All,
Was talking to a couple of people about the spreadsheet, and we don’t think the entry for Verizon Wireless is correct i.e. I don’t think DS-Lite is used for mobile. Is this a typo/error? Or can someone expand on this usage?
Thanks,
Nick

From: v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lee Howard
Sent: 19 January 2018 20:16
To: v6ops@ietf.org
Subject: [v6ops] discussion of transition technologies


The WG Chairs were discussing the various transition technologies at some length today.
I mentioned a previous conversation in another forum that led to this list of networks and their mechanisms:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ksOoWOaRdRyjZnjLSikHf4O5L1OUTNOO_7NK9vcVApc/edit#gid=0
(Corrections and additions encouraged, especially with links)

Our impression was that of the 26+ transition mechanisms defined, only a few have any modern relevance (editorial comments are mine, not consensus positions):
6rd.   It may be that its light is waning, with early deployments moving to native IPv6, and no new deployments.
DS-Lite.   Widely deployed, existing support among home gateway manufacturers.
NAT64/464xlat.   Implies NAT64, SIIT, which may be used elsewhere. Handset CLATs. No home gateway CLAT yet.
MAP-T.   Announced trials and lots of buzz, but no large-scale deployments, no home gateway support yet.
MAP-E.   Some buzz, no announced trials or deployments, no home gateway support yet.
Native dual-stack.   Still the gold standard, but doesn’t solve IPv4 address shortage.

(Note that “yet” may change at any time).
As a matter of discussion, do you agree?
To guide our work, is there work we should do to document or deprecate any of these?

Thanks,

Lee

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email