IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] LISP support for draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-00

Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 12 April 2017 19:23 UTC

Return-Path: <fredbaker.ietf@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 7C8D4129571 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 12:23:21 -0700 (PDT)
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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 1zhRqLpfeFLT for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 12:23:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf0-x22e.google.com (mail-pf0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22e]) (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 25802126557 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 12:23:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id o126so18041009pfb.3 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 12:23:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=7eOwZ2dyVLdIHoTGNfwTQHoDM+CuWy8jx6JNSTEPgIM=; b=Qjxl8uyNJjWYqiQjTxSdlaN7j1gUlFiu7klGbRpB5ft/jZvYQ30vwGezgvqKZpcYIu SE3jyiXaBmJ1AQBJau7+5hfFSEKbqzy57/T/H5wrqfxnz/xQXHqMZcqgNCa3/72ZX+nz Nks+kzl7fiLK96d3GmXOdEHypJk3bNY2Uc3CQvTedyDn9TOjbkAXDBcv9gTqxBeZrtFV ye8qce1c6XiO0cVo0ZRETMwT18Y4t2xSQ/JkHFCrTpwRRdjAhprreTC5DC6tloS1TdQ0 q4i110jAy/Z3JQecuLbnCXzTfbAk0FIU7VkEruH4rn6aDEEyEFBg7wKU7/beEQURYbdk qXxQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=7eOwZ2dyVLdIHoTGNfwTQHoDM+CuWy8jx6JNSTEPgIM=; b=oocDZEDLQYAyT9cDAFwpx8txa81Zi4ptmeWWGqN4QpbZWKoy6eYpDBP/lCAo9BS5Il Z6p1ZMO4gJM8chPYpXUPuJHEMlP0pCgvvrsu3YLckYmvQKckvb44oEyPalHAJObk2jEP yu2DJMHMpzoWMyEHotz2QsqjT4B9AjU+JsUnkdaZVC7SPIoZbkETAyNJNjUkjzECbYFB mwh2vXnCG+uj+1DfLneASH5Tp1iAzyBBzVH8GUZjkviMsbVfmg6ZiWHQc+68zi1Bal18 lOZkhkkaCt/nBAlI8Rju4FcmLvdAtaI2EDzkhUT94FsPfzWIMDdP1nrSD4u9O5CTIJSp ZSfA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/4nkH4EM8CIZjwfXL8xrjFb1Mbit3WFVQDWFMN/3DBsXa24NB52CjMm1llxDo1a1g==
X-Received: by 10.84.254.4 with SMTP id b4mr9299250plm.64.1492024999805; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 12:23:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.15] (wsip-184-191-158-59.sd.sd.cox.net. [184.191.158.59]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s21sm38223189pgg.65.2017.04.12.12.23.18 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 12 Apr 2017 12:23:18 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
From: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DB19E7B@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 12:23:17 -0700
Cc: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <AB210A18-8797-4111-B8B6-320912375604@gmail.com>
References: <D8F5C737-B01A-4EC8-9175-C4921C0CD69F@consulintel.es> <392D675B-73C4-40D3-81A8-A06907F5581D@employees.org> <3BBFC922-85BD-49B5-B39E-227F191BD48C@consulintel.es> <729244A1-E7AB-4BA0-8B39-A6122D2C32DB@employees.org> <CAD6AjGQyatWEOxCpnOn8H+SxG=BWM=cBPaXoON6vA7dj7TNqOQ@mail.gmail.com> <72F5C80C-DDB5-422E-8FEC-7D4157722780@consulintel.es> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DB19757@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <E181152D-C33F-418A-85BC-4F7829BEE16F@consulintel.es> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DB19CFE@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <E3C498E3-25FC-4612-B565-98818DB60AB8@consulintel.es> <ED7BCBE5-C124-4BB4-B42A-D857EC85E484@consulintel.es> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DB19E7B@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com>
To: "STARK, BARBARA H" <bs7652@att.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/UOU0ju8PnOoItClLsXUxzb6wsPw>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] LISP support for draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-00
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 19:23:21 -0000

> On Apr 12, 2017, at 11:54 AM, STARK, BARBARA H <bs7652@att.com> wrote:
> 
> If there's someone who wants RFC 4213, let them justify it without trying to add expense and complexity to my CE routers.

Aka "dual stack" and "Configured tunneling of IPv6 over IPv4", in the words of the RFC.

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4213
4213 Basic Transition Mechanisms for IPv6 Hosts and Routers. E. Nordmark,
     R. Gilligan. October 2005. (Format: TXT=58575 bytes) (Obsoletes
     RFC2893) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD) (DOI: 10.17487/RFC4213)

I think you will find dual stack pretty widely supported. SIXXS depended on the ability to configure tunnels through their tunnel broker, and HE's tunnel broker continues to. I suspect you will find IPv6/IPv4 tunnels supported on a variety of routers. I also suspect that your IPv6-capable residential customers won't need them. For them, RFC 4213 == Dual Stack.

If I were to whine about tunnels, it would be about the routing and security issues. RFCs 6169, 6324, 7059, a recent CCDCOE article, and so on.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email