Re: [v6ops] Comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices-09
Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Mon, 02 November 2015 22:26 UTC
Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@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 82B181A896C for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 14:26:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 Phc5QzOr2kWs for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 14:26:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pa0-x22f.google.com (mail-pa0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22f]) (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 6ADCE1A8969 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 14:26:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: by pabfh17 with SMTP id fh17so36791364pab.0 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 02 Nov 2015 14:26:57 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=kgkgeJ34o/W5YZcWg6nzVmEWz8wypqaXiXXZnwNUdXs=; b=s8z7ao57ziUAPLJIFFVSH888Wl83hqh9sinii0w+8+JChq3HNPVTQxNOei7hvnwFIe N6NLbiIKM3MnWBL+8T+aliQnQYIKVWOXp/C16Zu9GWb4xh4kdwvOiiCn431FD2/FRU0E TMVQzuWxl3+RxX6TsTSlAY0rdEjuBppWcV0TLI72HKSdFf2+6ZNobrc4Ao9UwgpbjNam lZeUGLt6t83OjR3wvNwRgGXS4liaEkDwsRHKLvFj2t7CzQfswAj1GrX3UZizOW8vKKdN UIKiCXb69B+mzK5ouXKA0zVbQI/pW54WVUFcDa1/udPe0lUysQGrTv0mT2WJRMsmc+G3 7Smw==
X-Received: by 10.68.131.202 with SMTP id oo10mr29579027pbb.40.1446503217067; Mon, 02 Nov 2015 14:26:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:df0:0:2006:c0da:ac17:5f6d:8e76? ([2001:df0:0:2006:c0da:ac17:5f6d:8e76]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id xe9sm25900179pbc.4.2015.11.02.14.26.53 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 02 Nov 2015 14:26:55 -0800 (PST)
To: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>, Philip Matthews <philip_matthews@magma.ca>, Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
References: <563734D2.2@gmail.com> <01D87BBE-112A-4F40-9F1B-2272B2471457@magma.ca> <5637DADF.8090308@bogus.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <5637E32E.1020504@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2015 11:26:54 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5637DADF.8090308@bogus.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/EK84A_95ABol747E8R2A-ZwLf3k>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices-09
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: Mon, 02 Nov 2015 22:26:58 -0000
On 03/11/2015 10:51, joel jaeggli wrote:
...
> dual stack deployment is a common operating modality and has been for a
> rather long time. there's definitely a tax to be payed with respect to
> resource usage, and complexity that doesn't exist in a v6 only network,
> but support of your existing model while building the new is incremental.
It seems to me that *this* draft should simply state that there are
two main options for service continuity for IPv4 applications (dual
stack or IPv4 as a service) but this is out of scope for the current
document. Otherwise the draft will get bogged down for months.
Brian
- [v6ops] Comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-design-choice… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [v6ops] Comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-design-ch… Philip Matthews
- Re: [v6ops] Comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-design-ch… joel jaeggli
- Re: [v6ops] Comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-design-ch… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [v6ops] Comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-design-ch… Philip Matthews
- Re: [v6ops] Comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-design-ch… Brian E Carpenter