Re: [v6ops] IPv4 trajectory

Brian E Carpenter 写道:
> In fact, I agree. So the sequence I'm thinking of for a transit
> or DFZ carrier is something like this:
>
> 1. (now) Run dual stack with ships-in-the-night routing, but
>    configuration and management is via IPv4.
>
> 2. (soon) Ditto, but some config & management moves to IPv6.
>
> 3. Ditto, but all config & management is via IPv6.
>   

Just for the information, this is easy for the backbone. CERNET2 
(IPv6-only) is doing this for about 10 years. Of cause, the BOSS is 
another story. xing

> 4. Observe that IPv4 has become secondary.
>
> 5. Therefore, migrate IPv4 support to run over IPv6.
>
> This is different (and simpler) than subscriber-facing carriers,
> because they will have to navigate all kinds of other issues
> like CGN and MAP on the client side.
>
> I'm not saying this is profound; just that it is a different
> trajectory from the ones we mainly discuss.
>
>    Brian
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>   