IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] reclassify 464XLAT as standard instead of info - double stack coexistence

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Mon, 25 September 2017 10:12 UTC

Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
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 6E7F51332DA for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 03:12:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.301
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.301 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_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=swm.pp.se
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 BaTHj6PnDQJq for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 03:12:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (ipv6.swm.pp.se [IPv6:2a00:801::f]) (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 6FA741321A7 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 03:12:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 502F9B2; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 12:12:50 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1506334370; bh=QTNL44ChLYLNR7xC8pqLHIHQN63mpY/WSB4Ui/WLyVw=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=yfIhP+wKt14D2ctgddRxRrIKftNkDE8GGnsH/lgD9TerppL6tbgIBpvfQIFTVaS0h xeIoWxJqWvyuvUoLkniRM26LKLH55T8eQTjJJcQ+VN5mEATKaIbANXR73WzuI1kiz8 VwMvDKwjn0q1db4asUbJByL4bhbzSyoywqlnWrts=
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 376F4B1; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 12:12:50 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 12:12:50 +0200
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
cc: Lee Howard <lee@asgard.org>, v6ops@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <e5e878a2-c26e-57d4-5e23-718a16e7bc5a@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1709251209550.18564@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <D5E8043B.86B21%lee@asgard.org> <E48DDA04-C058-4992-906E-8C8BC0E102AB@consulintel.es> <1BFA3605-4B16-4331-A7BA-3BDECBCA64EC@gmail.com> <85868796-18C7-48F4-BE69-8D50A1F47EF3@jisc.ac.uk> <472CC0F7-73C2-4A21-8F96-BBC966B01B77@employees.org> <de6b9aac-a3cc-0915-77c7-9fb880c3a16a@gmail.com> <20170921223305.B72A8878E716@rock.dv.isc.org> <122454EE-64C5-4768-A6A9-1AD0E872F5F9@employees.org> <2a879713-bfd0-2ba0-cb67-53726f6e1faf@gmail.com> <41c808ef-b2c0-6e74-e61d-e89fcebe5e0a@gmail.com> <FA8911A1-CE3E-40E2-A11F-12303A3B4D1C@asgard.org> <e38bb7d2-1376-e790-8c20-19d54ec6b163@gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1709251025270.18564@uplift.swm.pp.se> <30eddc4a-c2cc-0e6a-9a39-7db255705b16@gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1709251152340.18564@uplift.swm.pp.se> <e5e878a2-c26e-57d4-5e23-718a16e7bc5a@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/ZUtsqK_ofsQRNgMt0InXAs_yV9Y>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] reclassify 464XLAT as standard instead of info - double stack coexistence
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: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 10:12:54 -0000

On Mon, 25 Sep 2017, Alexandre Petrescu wrote:

> Because I need to understand whether the APNs dedicated to CLAT run 
> IPv6-only.  Do these networks do GTP-v4?  And PDP type IPv4-IPv6?

It doesn't matter if it's GTP over IPv4 or IPv6. The end device doesn't 
care. The important thing is what type of PDP context that is supported. 
If it's only IPv6 type PDP supoorted (or used), then this is "IPv6 only 
access". That's all the device sees. What the ISP uses to produce this 
service is irrelevant in this discussion.

> The ideal is "double stack" - no encap, no translation, no IN A in UDPv6 
> packets, no IN AAAA in UDPv4 packets, and PDP type v4v6.

You're pretty much alone in that definition.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email