Re: [v6ops] reclassify 464XLAT as standard instead of info

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

    Is this "IPv6-only" something wrong?  What do you mean by "forwarding 
    IPv4 at layer2".   IP is at layer 3, be it v4 or v6.  IP encapsulation 
    is also layer 3.
  
I’m going to make it clear in the new version. I mean using the in a layer 2 link “native IPv4 or native IPv6”. IPv6-only refers to “only” transporting native IPv6 packets, if IPv4 is translated or encapsulated on top of IPv6, then IPv4 is using the IPv6 as “if it was” a layer-2.
  
>
    > Regards, Jordi
    > 
    > 
    > -----Mensaje original----- De: v6ops <[e-mail]> en 
    > nombre de Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>
    > Responder a: <[e-mail]> Fecha: lunes, 25 de
    > septiembre de 2017, 11:21 Para: <[e-mail]> Asunto: Re: [v6ops]
    > reclassify 464XLAT as standard instead of info
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > Le 25/09/2017 à 11:05, Kossut Tomasz - Hurt a écrit :
    >> Hi,
    >> 
    >> True ! 464xlat enabled IPv6 transition for mobile networks. Thank 
    >> you ! In IPv6-only network you can expect up to 60% native IPv6
    > 
    > ? I thought in an IPv6-only network there is 100% native IPv6?
    > 
    > Alex
    > 
    >> 
    >> Cheers,
    >> 
    >> TK
    >> 
    >> *From:*Lorenzo Colitti [mailto:[e-mail]] *Sent:* Monday, 
    >> September 25, 2017 3:55 AM *To:* Mark Andrews *Cc:* Gert Doering; 
    >> [e-mail] WG *Subject:* Re: [v6ops] reclassify 464XLAT as 
    >> standard instead of info
    >> 
    >> On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 6:25 AM, Mark Andrews <[e-mail] 
    >> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
    >> 
    >> Stop exaggerating.  Google went and added CLAT to the Android. They
    >> can just as easily add DS-Lite to Android and we would have 
    >> billions of machines that support DS-Lite.  Just because NAT64 and 
    >> 464XLAT are sexy doesn't mean that it is good technology.
    >> 
    >> We added 464xlat to Android because there were credible deployment 
    >> plans in place for 464xlat on real networks that Android devices 
    >> connect to. In hindsight, we were right, as 464xlat went from 
    >> credible plan to successful deployment with an installed base in 
    >> the tens of millions.
    >> 
    >> I personally think that if we had not done this, we wouldn't have 
    >> IPv6-only mobile networks today and we'd all still be lamenting the
    >> chicken and egg problem for IPv6-only networks. Getting rid of IPv4
    >> in the network is a great step forward, and as Apple has shown,
    >> once that's happened, host OSes can start removing IPv4 access from
    >> applications, too. (And make no mistake: without 464xlat, those
    >> networks would *not* have gone IPv6-only, and it would have been
    >> much harder, or even impossible, for Apple to say that apps must
    >> operate in IPv6-only environments, because there would have been no
    >> such environments.)
    >> 
    >> DS-Lite has no such credible deployment plans in place. Wifi 
    >> networks are going to provide IPv4 for many years. Mobile networks 
    >> were never going to deploy DS-Lite because the encapsulation would 
    >> have broken their billing platforms. And so, here we are.
    >> 
    >> We'll all get to IPv6-only eventually, and some time after that, 
    >> we'll get rid of IPv4. At that time, you can salt the earth over 
    >> 464xlat if you want. But until then, I wouldn't be too eager to 
    >> bash 464xlat as a technology. It was the right thing to do at the 
    >> time.
    >> 
    >> 
    >> 
    >> _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list
    >>  [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
    >> 
    > 
    > _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list 
    > [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you 
    > ready for the new Internet ? http://www.consulintel.es 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.
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list 
    > [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
    > 
    
    _______________________________________________
    v6ops mailing list
    [e-mail]
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
    



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
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.