IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Operational Consensus on deployment

Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com> Tue, 05 August 2014 15:08 UTC

Return-Path: <cb.list6@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 743FB1B2896 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Aug 2014 08:08:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.75
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 ylnrWeI2y5A1 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Aug 2014 08:08:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wg0-x229.google.com (mail-wg0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::229]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9A3E1B2890 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Aug 2014 08:08:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wg0-f41.google.com with SMTP id z12so1179848wgg.24 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 05 Aug 2014 08:08:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=F9gBWimGsgBsoe3GyWKCP4ilcWYcUGcoNKOO4o31gpY=; b=vuEhrpkuWs+d4xs5n9jGJgYDuNHgY2gU8o+Y+64Z1JnKvjwPkVmZPZxPmCsjigZTDl KOdzTeNUG5h9VUuxqQJAVzZbaABTKFT+/OtGxYAcjJKSOkRye2SVfBPwtjnWNDrQtcRw l7mxafRQuGmhRQsxceHKg2S30JglPS9vBHMzQOlTNe1L79T3V4z5NBe3cLitZaZqhy5E BY1JAM1KP8yTloqS6f+KaCrPHtifg2Ze360F5k3q3CRkXf6TizvsZMJOCCiE3cjCcKII Ieba2KKVL5ebtTzqfi8Hjlq835mP4F8Mjp7EGaRifM8o8sStAqoJayZvrtMIS6X/cvMP chHA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.181.13.44 with SMTP id ev12mr42043841wid.57.1407251295036; Tue, 05 Aug 2014 08:08:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.49.133 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Aug 2014 08:08:14 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <53E06AC9.9010908@fud.no>
References: <256EAE0B-5C11-42C7-BCA1-CEC7EE6713A7@cisco.com> <53DFD634.4020304@fud.no> <DE860EBC-171E-46E7-A3B6-5E8B79A453CC@cisco.com> <53DFEC6C.3010707@gmail.com> <CAD6AjGRUWxT5XiNxMi_S5VgYtGMLb_FVHXN-ZfGpcY=geix15g@mail.gmail.com> <53E06AC9.9010908@fud.no>
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2014 08:08:14 -0700
Message-ID: <CAD6AjGTwt-20gXs=RUH5zbhT+g3HKrvXHX3FnShjF1srqU21Fw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com>
To: Tore Anderson <tore@fud.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/jD_2vlMYgtccJ2SgUiV06uW9Xng
Cc: IPv6 Ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Operational Consensus on deployment
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Tue, 05 Aug 2014 15:08:24 -0000

On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 10:25 PM, Tore Anderson <tore@fud.no> wrote:
> * Ca By
>
>> With 464xlat, afaik, there are globally 3 cellular providers that offer
>> default ipv6 (464xlat at tmobile us and Orange PL and DS at VZ).
>
> Make that four, Telenor Norway has been doing IPv6-only/NAT64/464XLAT
> since early June.
>
> http://www.telenor.no/privat/kundeservice/mobilhjelp/internettpamobilen/feilsokingmmsoginternett.jsp
>
> So far only one model (Samsung S5) defaults to the new IPv6-only APN,
> but from what I hear they'll keep adding new models and push OTA updates
> to other existing ones.
>

This is excellent.  Well done Telenor.

CB

> * Brian E Carpenter
>
>>> (In parenthesis, I've never seen sunsetting IPv4 as a real problem.
>>> One day somebody will notice that there are no more IPv4 packets. But
>>> that is many years in the future.)
>
> The thing is, if you've built your infrastructure on IPv4, removing it
> is going to be a royal pain in the arse. Even if all the IPv4 users have
> left the public internet, if your application server speaks to your
> database server over IPv4, and the database server speaks to the iSCSI
> array over IPv4, and so on and so on, then you're simply not in a
> position to easily shut IPv4 off.
>
> Tore
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email