IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> Wed, 24 June 2015 12:39 UTC

Return-Path: <alexandru.petrescu@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 854F71A8A82 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 05:39:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.983
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.983 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=ham
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 csegSlvN9LR2 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 05:39:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sainfoin-out.extra.cea.fr (sainfoin-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.145]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9EBF1A8A7E for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 05:39:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by sainfoin.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-2.3) with ESMTP id t5OCdDxP018602 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 14:39:13 +0200
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 91485200805 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 14:42:08 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from muguet2.intra.cea.fr (muguet2.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.7]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88B472007FE for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 14:42:08 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (is227335.intra.cea.fr [10.8.34.184]) by muguet2.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.2) with ESMTP id t5OCdC0K015063 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 14:39:13 +0200
Message-ID: <558AA4F1.8080503@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 14:39:13 +0200
From: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: v6ops@ietf.org
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> <CAD6AjGTscUeDL6zC62tHL300M9QCD4_CHZUErQYejMUJVVetzw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAD6AjGTscUeDL6zC62tHL300M9QCD4_CHZUErQYejMUJVVetzw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/E--LRyy4MsS_7t3X-edSfTkJNDc>
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 12:39:17 -0000


Le 24/06/2015 14:13, Ca By a écrit :
>
>
> On Wednesday, June 24, 2015, Erik Kline <ek@google.com
> <mailto: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 ?

Android is a linux based os, I dont see why it wouldnt support dhcp-pd?

My linux based non-Android machines do dhcp-pd ok.

Alex

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email