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

[Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

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
>