IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Hemant Singh (shemant)" <shemant@cisco.com> Mon, 22 June 2015 14:47 UTC

Return-Path: <shemant@cisco.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 6C4211ACDB4 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 07:47:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 n9zdh-lrMbdM for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 07:47:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-5.cisco.com (alln-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.142.92]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 599551ACDB6 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 07:47:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1298; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1434984460; x=1436194060; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=kytHmJsoXNoSU5qLDRYmELlLUsWyczdNW93+1SSK8Wk=; b=Opt07VOT9lsKNmXG9l5fW+OHuZw8Uurl3EVZLex8mX/Hl5Cyr5uLrs/Z BTUs1rdEmGJMTdW08enPd6yUCDEhySsUD81PNKXWgeyhxQPRPEu0POr62 r7Tz/89xZSVyDD2vOQj236vux/KxjGIcTCR6n/gaZbFeI5x73hKvdkyP5 Y=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AmBQBJH4hV/4UNJK1cgxCBMwaDGLp2h14CHIEcORMBAQEBAQEBgQqEIgEBAQQjEUUMBAIBCBEEAQEDAgYdAwICAjAUAQgIAgQOBQiIEgMSs3uQIgqFXgEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAReBIYokhFUWGwcGgmIvgRQBBJN9AaN+JoN5b4FGgQIBAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.13,659,1427760000"; d="scan'208";a="161736163"
Received: from alln-core-11.cisco.com ([173.36.13.133]) by alln-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 22 Jun 2015 14:47:39 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x10.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x10.cisco.com [173.37.183.84]) by alln-core-11.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t5MEldWt005361 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 22 Jun 2015 14:47:39 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x06.cisco.com ([169.254.6.34]) by xhc-rcd-x10.cisco.com ([173.37.183.84]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 09:47:39 -0500
From: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" <shemant@cisco.com>
To: Ross Chandler <ross@eircom.net>
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] Apple and IPv6, a few clarifications - 64share
Thread-Index: AQHQrN24pinb6cqb6Eq6EbqjHCiHuJ24xLgAgAACKoD//8a7cIAAW8oA//+vDLA=
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 14:47:38 +0000
Message-ID: <75B6FA9F576969419E42BECB86CB1B89168A9E9E@xmb-rcd-x06.cisco.com>
References: <E1C235B5-1421-4DAF-A2F3-F963982233DF@apple.com> <5587EFDD.6030807@gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1506221415100.9487@uplift.swm.pp.se> <AB88C7C2-A367-4233-9214-A210E47F1507@eircom.net> <75B6FA9F576969419E42BECB86CB1B89168A9E06@xmb-rcd-x06.cisco.com> <0E9A1FA2-6C5E-4526-8BDF-76AC5D9F3B3E@eircom.net>
In-Reply-To: <0E9A1FA2-6C5E-4526-8BDF-76AC5D9F3B3E@eircom.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.131.71.110]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/Tn1LJy8Z7xV9oWsolTVkKs1fTO8>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
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: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 14:47:41 -0000

-----Original Message-----
From: Ross Chandler [mailto:ross@eircom.net] 
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 10:28 AM
To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
Cc: Mikael Abrahamsson; v6ops@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Apple and IPv6, a few clarifications - 64share

>Are you arguing for DHCPv6-PD prior to the stopgap of L2 bridging and 64share? I’ve seen this implemented in UEs.

It's up to the provider to deploy what they choose to deploy.   I am only discussing pitfalls with each tech being considered for deployment.  I do have a preference for DHCPv6 PD and routing.  The reason is DHCPv6 PD and IPv6 CE router can support all of wifi, Bluetooth, etc.  Additionally, devices such as Apple TV in the home can be assigned ULAs which the router on the phone will never forward to the WAN - thus no video from the home leaks to the cellular network.  I will never consider a technology that leaks a home's  TV video to the cellular network.  

Hemant

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email