IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Apple and IPv6, a few clarifications - 64share

Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com> Wed, 24 June 2015 12:13 UTC

Return-Path: <cb.list6@gmail.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 5FB4A1A8A15 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 05:13:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 w4KmlpNYrsMH for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 05:13:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x22b.google.com (mail-wi0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22b]) (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 EA34A1A8A11 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 05:13:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wiga1 with SMTP id a1so133785778wig.0 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 05:13:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=P3cdowdEUyAgfbIKujnt9zMY1jSSDyKJIaunV87qp/0=; b=eBR97NEOzVFMUSaRSjU7cki4EeQb6Jal1wvStjUofDZ1hyff3Z30JTX8/gnczbH4zt jVS/eN1rxo6Rplzep7UplyZlFqfbY7ByA8LauDz9rs+GuQQl3WP15aOmI3Ke11FqtNXx xxfZVYp+q4/+DFa7k4lw7gcHSuqOCwxVBfPm1/AhwahInZeHIfd+MRP2a1O3CuiiMiDp HL9o8/YVZTDbK3bnNLDWcFL0ErYfKLQpLMyEFixQHYMMVlJr9p7Oux1Vxycp/iu1boHz 7n9tgpGfYsZ4gyH2fee3OZpWpQq1jdHNsmSSSUe/JpN2bZm6QzHPLO1kPMFUcivW7X6z 3oWA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.72.145 with SMTP id d17mr4333766wiv.69.1435148011671; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 05:13:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.79.65 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 05:13:31 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAAedzxo7Cqxwrp_zViDhOhWc+dtcy9M9=a-FjW7M8APNx7VUQA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <E1C235B5-1421-4DAF-A2F3-F963982233DF@apple.com> <5587EFDD.6030807@gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1506221415100.9487@uplift.swm.pp.se> <CAAedzxo7Cqxwrp_zViDhOhWc+dtcy9M9=a-FjW7M8APNx7VUQA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 05:13:31 -0700
Message-ID: <CAD6AjGTscUeDL6zC62tHL300M9QCD4_CHZUErQYejMUJVVetzw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com>
To: Erik Kline <ek@google.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="14dae9cc94926faa820519426fd6"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/9AVXfjMTR0Ts1fk4J1UfBPLV2ZY>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Apple and IPv6, a few clarifications - 64share
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: <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 Jun 2015 12:13:34 -0000

On Wednesday, June 24, 2015, Erik Kline <ek@google.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 9:16 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > On Mon, 22 Jun 2015, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
> >
> >> It is better to tell the operator to provide a /63 to smartphones (not a
> >> /64), with DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation.  That will fix it.
> >
> >
> > DHCPv6-PD exists in recent 3GPP documents, but vendor implementation of
> this
> > is not wide-spread. We do *not* want to gate IPv6 rollout in mobile
> networks
> > on this functionality. Yes, we want it, but we can't wait for it.
>
> (off-topic: So, are you saying that DT is most definitely not blocked
> on DHCPv6-PD as far as enabling IPv6 on LTE is concerned?)
>
>
Erik,

Probably chicken and eggs with a side of  customers dont care.

Does Android suppot dhcp-pd ?

CB

_______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org <javascript:;>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email