Re: [v6ops] About Req for Comments - "Transition to IPv6"

[JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[e-mail]>]

Hi Fred,

In my document, instead of network, I try to explain that "what part of the network" should be explicited.

If you use IPv6-only network, then we mean "the complete network".

If you want to say in the WAN/access network, this is clear as well.

I think using scenario will present the same problem. If we call scenario a given network, we are talking about the full network. If we say WAN-scenario, is the same as WAN-network, we are just expliciting that is not the full network, but only that specific part.

I know that you are talking here about the OMB document, but I will like to understad if you think (hat-off) the way the document try to work on this terminology is good enough, or you suggest any changes.

Thanks!


El 12/3/20 3:07, "v6ops en nombre de Fred Baker" <[e-mail] en nombre de [e-mail]> escribió:

    
    
    > On Mar 5, 2020, at 8:46 AM, Owen DeLong <[e-mail]> wrote:
    > 
    >> Thank you very much for the pointer.  In it I could spot
    >> the following footnote: "[4] IPv6-Only refers to network environments in
    >> which use of the IPv4 protocol has been eliminated.”
    > 
    > IPv6-Only refers to network environments which are not using IPv4. That could be a network where IPv4 has been eliminated (rare at this time, though Facebook is a significant example) or it could be a greenfield deployment where IPv4 was never deployed.
    
    <sans hats>
    
    This, I think, is where the v6ops discussion has travelled in circles forever. To me, I would drop the word "network" and say that it is a specified environment. If I say that a system is IPv6-only, it is not using IPv6 internally or externally. It might or might not have IPv4 code in it, but it's not using it. If I say that a LAN, building, etc is IPv6-only, it is not to say that it couldn't have IPv4 in it if a DHCP server started handing out such addresses, but that it *doesn't*. If it is an Autonomous System, it means that only IPv6 is in use in that domain.
    
    As soon as we get into the "but it could" or "was it translated from something else" or whatever rathole, we're into a discussion of angels, pins, and heads of pins. It will not end, because it can't. Someone will forever come up with a "what if" scenario to stir the pot.
    
    Speaking for myself, I would have the user of the term identify the environment s/he is talking about, and say that *within*that*domain* communication is entirely accomplished using IPv6.
    
    And STOP.
    _______________________________________________
    v6ops mailing list
    [e-mail]
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
    



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.