Re: [v6ops] discussion of transition technologies

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Mon, 22 January 2018 11:05 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 A6A23124234 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 03:05:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.311
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.311 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, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 mgIUEPfDyGJ3 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 03:05:51 -0800 (PST)
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 00C571201F8 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 03:05:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 95AD7B0; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:05:46 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1516619146; bh=NeVPSycMhjGlEvpI0SPbdfaQ2z1elEfEjVsgAV0uaDc=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=bNd9Cd9Hhe4p6aYUBCVmOXnBkOeDt0yHgd2RWuiQERXQYLG+gUYZTznhc2Nv27AaW kHbROOLGXzNY70wqUt52roXRaL2FHDv5Qv7jQuBDpxnk2rR+FZTIJUf8WPCljOxvQ4 GYlhM2KFY+IiJ/ucrDW582Z08yA4K7RRg7sldPEM=
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9382E9F; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:05:46 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:05:46 +0100 (CET)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Lee Howard <lee@asgard.org>
cc: v6ops@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <D687BC24.92CC1%lee@asgard.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1801221205190.8884@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <D687BC24.92CC1%lee@asgard.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; BOUNDARY="-137064504-570315284-1516619146=:8884"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/jQ6qjmu-wcPwJTyf67dT_d6pj_Y>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] discussion of transition technologies
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, 22 Jan 2018 11:05:54 -0000

On Fri, 19 Jan 2018, Lee Howard wrote:

> Native dual-stack.   Still the gold standard, but doesn’t solve IPv4 address
> shortage.

Well, this, but with IPv4 behind CGN. I know people who do this for 
mobile.

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