[v6ops] Re: Call For Adoption: draft-link-v6ops-6mops

Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com> Mon, 12 August 2024 14:58 UTC

Return-Path: <furry13@gmail.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 8A975C1840ED for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Aug 2024 07:58:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.855
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.855 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XkzHjblY7MeS for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Aug 2024 07:58:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x22c.google.com (mail-lj1-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A50CC18870B for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Aug 2024 07:58:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x22c.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2f149845fbaso46861081fa.3 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Aug 2024 07:58:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1723474698; x=1724079498; darn=ietf.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=b57FocYFJe1jxp8OaSdsALPFqU24qz6kbgDbEOlvsSs=; b=amQ5w7fybqQ0G+IQ5cyPAq8UmT3Sqj1nazn72uKMfk7GYzoYJTweaaEGFza0e4s8J2 UmPaJf6fYzJWOhxqAH7ta5DQmShvFvkSExC+SAeh3i1Zf+2gMLimnw5uIs96w546LGEJ DFaVXJvsBjrL3DdRDAyCxejn3Cg/EBSUST7c29h96FlkHrbt7aPKbkdUJ2nhOJzNDvKy pwYwGl3YMMJ260ESzAqhv9cQ2WwB61+EQgjL+5GsV+pPYoWVN3E6mfG2bOCwTAJdKY5o HgIe83WkHQN+38R/2sFt9odfdV8FPc7jQZmTfwY8TGYEa+xeQMC8sEMBdltcZ/BGFtNL 2kcw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1723474698; x=1724079498; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=b57FocYFJe1jxp8OaSdsALPFqU24qz6kbgDbEOlvsSs=; b=OIxom/M3uJi1SZRI9s3C3/373Rk+GEfBL88QupuYxypToX5EZGQW9hi64BjCI+33qd Z51xDyyYp+84DCoFIIm/kzPnhSKW38cZIpMrQYvuosyR85ynvJxWJa/2tXDhks/gqNy8 AIgZFjgYoVakL1sY/JdBY+7RyYGM62r/dAxdIuvNHSBA5mo/gM5JTmI76iconPqrbg48 9VBMYGKVmVmBBCUfYwkX3pvU5UsJU0tt96HxsSso+zX2lmy5vxx1PFhs3UD6fszREYiT M2BKRcg6r/+YLDhIkf5NT8ckNrUuTf/b0mUrvxi7A3JnYdb5Dbzoz4Cdk0MkHvrW3GOT jOqA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Ywf8maAXpKnBLBEZwE4qbkAACJ0XdkFPvKCiKwldpk4MgyaXYoG Frd3Fs5vktyvK89G13N76te7iSbdi/hCQOGGF+eUwoev4Gi/2IPbDk8uSxhiN49sdKtt1+9Z3cq XnecBhKILnzegFnlaNTsfWt4WyTc4zQlcfDA=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEq9qwhBFeos9qycacQXzfc95tYaiOR06NsOo9dX7gHNJQMS2vg+k2u0H5MZYYz5CzMlVImVwET4O0Moxg16uE=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9b98:0:b0:2ef:2c6a:4929 with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2f2b714e6e4mr4153561fa.13.1723474697710; Mon, 12 Aug 2024 07:58:17 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <BL0PR05MB5316B10BC93B52412415EC79AEBE2@BL0PR05MB5316.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CAFU7BAS7Wez2o=56gOd8OmHHCi6CbopoAsk7jAWUWdZ1FADdag@mail.gmail.com> <001801dae97e$53ef6540$fbce2fc0$@tsinghua.org.cn> <CANMZLAbZiYhLGB5m_RHbh1aYok770ca3_K_TghSMGqTUvGmNRg@mail.gmail.com> <DB9PR07MB7771686DB74D4C7D3905E3FFD6B92@DB9PR07MB7771.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <003801dae988$8b84ef20$a28ecd60$@tsinghua.org.cn> <CACMsEX_8AD5w2ka=suYg6hGoW8S4-vSe2XxHsT3wMcPNWkuf_w@mail.gmail.com> <93377960-3C48-4B54-ABD5-7C96FBDAE7B0@consulintel.es>
In-Reply-To: <93377960-3C48-4B54-ABD5-7C96FBDAE7B0@consulintel.es>
From: Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2024 00:58:06 +1000
Message-ID: <CAFU7BAQSJ-41pnbyPz3J=e_uJ966-JZWG6yrkMjPQsj7SJK3Uw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "jordi.palet@consulintel.es" <jordi.palet=40consulintel.es@dmarc.ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID-Hash: LQQPO6CCOZD34LBLJOT2ULXIXUI4ZSCT
X-Message-ID-Hash: LQQPO6CCOZD34LBLJOT2ULXIXUI4ZSCT
X-MailFrom: furry13@gmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-v6ops.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: IPv6 Ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [v6ops] Re: Call For Adoption: draft-link-v6ops-6mops
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/9A0Tka-WOUvSt5guTreqLQoPJS4>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:v6ops-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:v6ops-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:v6ops-leave@ietf.org>

On Mon, Aug 12, 2024 at 6:40 PM jordi.palet@consulintel.es
<jordi.palet=40consulintel.es@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
> While I agree that IPv6-only and IPv6-mostly are different things, I disagree that “IPv6-only” is widely understood as “no IPv4”.
>
> As explained in https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-palet-v6ops-ipv6-only/
>
> The problem comes because “IPv6-only” needs a context to be correctly defined.

I do not think it's a problem. Any terminology requires some context
(my recent favorite example is 'extension header' which would mean
completely different things for IPv6 (RFC8200) and ICMPv6 (RFC4884).

> Should I revive that document and include IPv6-mostly definition there?

Personally I dislike spending too much time on the definition (we can
argue forever what 'a table' is and wouldn't be able to differentiate
it from 'a bar stool' ;)

draft-link-v6ops-6mops defines IPv6-Mostly, so the readers shall know
what it's about.

> El 8 ago 2024, a las 18:21, Nick Buraglio <buraglio@forwardingplane.net> escribió:
>
> *No hat*
>
> On Thu, Aug 8, 2024 at 6:47 AM Aijun Wang <wangaijun@tsinghua.org.cn> wrote:
>
>
> No.  Declaring the “IPv6-Only” network does not preclude that the network can support IPv4 communication.
>
>
> From the perspective of an operator migrating off of IPv6 and onto
>
> IPv6 exclusively, I strongly disagree. Either by policy or by
> technical limitation (configured or inherent), "IPv6-only" is widely
> understood to mean "no IPv4".
>
>
> The IPv4 communication can still be transmitted via the tunnel technology, that is “IPv4 Communication as a IPv6 service”
>
>
> I think that is out of scope. Whatever is inside the tunnel - and
> thereby "invisible" to the network substrate is irrelevant. The tunnel
> would still be required to operate over IPv6.
>
>
>
>
> Comparing with evolution of mobile technologies, there is no operator declare their network is “4G-mostly network” when they want to put forward to the 4G phase, but need still support the 3G host/endpoint.
>
>
> Again, I think this is orthogonal. That is a lower layer. If I ran a
> network that was 70% Ethernet and 30% SONET I wouldn't call it
> "Ethernet only", either. I would describe it as "mostly ethernet".
>
>
>
>
> Introducing the “IPv6-Mostly Network” concept, in my POV, is worse than the “Dual Stack”, and it will also mask some hinder problems that can’t be emerged at the dual-stack phase.
>
>
> As someone that has been working on these migrations to IPv6-only for
> several years, I can assure you it is not the same as dual-stack. It
> is a welcomed transition strategy that has a visible end site with an
> operator incentive to continue the migration, whereas with dual-stack
> there was no real incentive to move past it.
>
>
>
>
> When the operators declare clearly they are toward to the “IPv6-Only Network”, they can certainly accelerate the conversion of IPv6-only application, and also the gradual removal of the outdated hosts. But, introduce the concept of “IPv6-Mostly Network”, can give the transition more time to take action-----Similar with the effect of “Dual Stack”.
>
>
> See above. Dual-stack was a necessary step, and one that the server
> and service side probably still needs. 6mostly is the next phase for
> the *access* networks.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Best Regards
>
>
>
> Aijun Wang
>
> China Telecom
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 发件人: Tim Chown [mailto:Tim.Chown@jisc.ac.uk]
> 发送时间: 2024年8月8日 18:55
> 收件人: Brian Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>; Aijun Wang <wangaijun@tsinghua.org.cn>
> 抄送: Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>; IPv6 Ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>
> 主题: Re: [v6ops] Re: 答复: Re: Call For Adoption: draft-link-v6ops-6mops
>
>
>
> Indeed, it’s a very nice way to get on the path to removing IPv4 and a nice term for that process; the “most” referring to the property that most hosts on a subnet switch to IPv6-only, while those not capable continue to use IPv4 for some or all operation.
>
>
>
> Tim
>
>
>
> From: Brian Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
> Date: Thursday, 8 August 2024 at 11:51
> To: Aijun Wang <wangaijun@tsinghua.org.cn>
> Cc: Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>, IPv6 Ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>
> Subject: [v6ops] Re: 答复: Re: Call For Adoption: draft-link-v6ops-6mops
>
> Aijun,
>
>
>
> I disagree. When talking to site operators who want to proceed towards IPv6 infastructure but have vital systems that cannot be updated from IPv4 immediately, the new term "IPv6 mostly" is exactly what they want to hear. Many sites are in that situation but would like to avoid dual stack on the wire.
>
>
>
> (via tiny screen & keyboard)
> Regards,
>        Brian Carpenter
>
>
>
> On Thu, 8 Aug 2024, 22:33 Aijun Wang, <wangaijun@tsinghua.org.cn> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> It seems that the newly assigned name "IPv6-Mostly network" may lead confusion or need more explanations to the customers.
> How about change the document name solely to "Deployment and Operations Consideration on IPv6-Only Network", and omit the introduction of new concept of "IPv6-Mostly network"?
>
> And, for the operator transit to IPv6-Only network, besides the C2S(client to server) communication, the C2C(client to client) communication requirement should also need to be addressed. It seems the document is lack of consideration for such part.
>
>
> Best Regards
>
> Aijun Wang
> China Telecom
>
> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: forwardingalgorithm@ietf.org [mailto:forwardingalgorithm@ietf.org] 代表 Jen Linkova
> 发送时间: 2024年8月5日 22:22
> 收件人: Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>
> 抄送: v6ops@ietf.org
> 主题: [v6ops] Re: Call For Adoption: draft-link-v6ops-6mops
>
> The draft can be found at
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-link-v6ops-6mops/
>
> On Mon, Aug 5, 2024 at 11:21 PM Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
>
> Friends,
>
> This message begins a Call For Adoption for draft-link-v6ops-6mops. Please read the draft and send your comments in response to this email.
>
> The call for adoption will close on August 19, 2024.
>
>                                                              Ron
>
>
>
> Juniper Business Use Only
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list -- v6ops@ietf.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to v6ops-leave@ietf.org
>
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers, Jen Linkova
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list -- v6ops@ietf.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to v6ops-leave@ietf.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list -- v6ops@ietf.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to v6ops-leave@ietf.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list -- v6ops@ietf.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to v6ops-leave@ietf.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list -- v6ops@ietf.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to v6ops-leave@ietf.org
>
>
>
> **********************************************
> IPv4 is over
> Are you ready for the new Internet ?
> http://www.theipv6company.com
> 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
> To unsubscribe send an email to v6ops-leave@ietf.org



-- 
Cheers, Jen Linkova