Re: [v6ops] draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

Yannis,
On 31-Mar-21 20:25, Yannis Nikolopoulos wrote:
> 
> 
> On 3/30/21 11:18 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> On 31-Mar-21 07:33, Yannis Nikolopoulos wrote:
>>>
>>> On 3/28/21 9:47 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>>> Dual stack has no time limit
>>> (for us ISPs) it has, it painfully has, if your user base is still growing
>> Isn't that what CGN was invented for? That's the incumbent technology, with IPv4aaS as a new alternative.
> 
> Yes, but CGN usually implies single stack, hence my comment.

That isn't clear to me. Maybe I am biased because of the model
described by https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6264.
(I'm definitely biased because of RFC1671 too ;-)

> In our case, we're also providing IPv6 to the NAT444 customers and have 
> been messing with IPv4aaS (LW4o6 in the past and MAP-E currently) for a 
> few years now

Good stuff. My definition of dual-stack *from the user's point of view*
is that as long as both AF_INET and AF_INET6 work, i.e. the host can use
both A and AAAA records, the network is dual stack. The user doesn't
care how the ISP and the CE router delivers this.

    Brian

> 
> regards,
> Yannis
>>
>> (Don't misunderstand me, I hate CGN as much as anybody.)
>>
>>     Brian
> 
> .
>