Re: [v6ops] sense of draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment
Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> Tue, 30 March 2021 10:07 UTC
Return-Path: <alexandre.petrescu@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 2F16E3A2DAF for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 03:07:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.652
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.652 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=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 rB-udrAVzMzG for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 03:07:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3E703A2DAD for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 03:07:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by oxalide-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 12UA7Zb0020305; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 12:07:35 +0200
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 6AEB7205781; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 12:07:35 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.12]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D3712014EC; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 12:07:35 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [10.14.10.71] ([10.14.10.71]) by muguet1-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 12UA7Zhv008627; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 12:07:35 +0200
To: Giuseppe Fioccola <giuseppe.fioccola@huawei.com>, "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
References: <6fe89c92-a7f1-baf2-6225-7c1bc397c8ee@gmail.com> <7837404c0ba34ef38567a1d74df6381c@huawei.com>
From: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <82bbfb68-4489-6987-11fd-954e8e9eccf5@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 12:07:34 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <7837404c0ba34ef38567a1d74df6381c@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: fr
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/LThlKyylQyIEars-dC-gxy_dm6A>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] sense of draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 10:07:51 -0000
Le 30/03/2021 à 09:44, Giuseppe Fioccola a écrit : > Hi Alexandre, Yes, the main scope is to describe the global IPv6 > deployment and provide an overview on how the transition to IPv6 is > progressing, indeed the draft is informational. Anyway, according to > the statistics and to the surveys, it can be possible to make some > general considerations and report transition challenges in order to > encourage actions in the areas identified (e.g. section "Call for > action"). I agree. However, I have a doubt. At a point this draft says: "It is recommended that all networking standards assume the use of IPv6 and be written so they do not require IPv4 ([RFC6540])." Incidentally, I agree with the recommendation, but it is still an advice. If we want to not put an advice then we dont put it, end of phrase. Besides, the paragraph above sounds great, and I agree with it. But it refers to RFC6540. That RFC is great, and is a BCP. But in detail, it (RFC6540) says this, among other things that are ok: > To ensure interoperability and flexibility, the best practices are > as follows: > [...] > > o New and updated IP networking implementations should support IPv4 > and IPv6 coexistence (dual-stack), but must not require IPv4 for > proper and complete function. This requirement is great, but in practice, 464XLAT needs IPv4 in order to work. So the 'must not require IPv4 for proper and complete function' is not respected. A smartphone that is qualified as 'IPv6-only' by many still has an IPv4 stack in it and still runs IPv4 software. That is a problem. This might represent a basis that - when shaken - goes up to the 'it is recommended' of this draft that I mentioned earlier. Alex > > Giuseppe > > -----Original Message----- From: v6ops > [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alexandre Petrescu > Sent: Monday, March 29, 2021 6:48 PM To: v6ops@ietf.org Subject: > [v6ops] sense of draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment > > I wanted to ask whether the sense of the intention of > draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment is: > > - to describe deployment? > > - or to give advice about what the deployment should be? > > For my part, I think it should solely describe deployment. > > Alex > > _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >
- [v6ops] sense of draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [v6ops] sense of draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployme… Giuseppe Fioccola
- Re: [v6ops] sense of draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployme… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [v6ops] sense of draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployme… JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- Re: [v6ops] sense of draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployme… Giuseppe Fioccola
- Re: [v6ops] sense of draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployme… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [v6ops] sense of draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployme… JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- Re: [v6ops] sense of draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployme… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [v6ops] sense of draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployme… JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- [v6ops] The meaning of "IPv6-only" -- Re: sense o… Gabor LENCSE
- Re: [v6ops] sense of draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployme… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [v6ops] The meaning of "IPv6-only" -- Re: sen… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [v6ops] sense of draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployme… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [v6ops] sense of draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployme… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [v6ops] The meaning of "IPv6-only" -- Re: sen… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [v6ops] The meaning of "IPv6-only" -- Re: sen… Mark Andrews
- Re: [v6ops] The meaning of "IPv6-only" -- Re: sen… Fred Baker
- Re: [v6ops] The meaning of "IPv6-only" -- Re: sen… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [v6ops] The meaning of "IPv6-only" -- Re: sen… JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- Re: [v6ops] The meaning of "IPv6-only" -- Re: sen… JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- Re: [v6ops] The meaning of "IPv6-only" -- Re: sen… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [v6ops] The meaning of "IPv6-only" -- Re: sen… JORDI PALET MARTINEZ