Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-chen-v6ops-ipv6-roaming-analysis

"cb.list6" <cb.list6@gmail.com> Thu, 01 August 2013 04:40 UTC

Return-Path: <cb.list6@gmail.com>
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 2710421F9B6A for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 21:40:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.359
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.359 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.240, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IveGUPhe9DjV for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 21:40:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wg0-x22f.google.com (mail-wg0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::22f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F34D521F8EFE for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 21:40:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wg0-f47.google.com with SMTP id j13so1279202wgh.14 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 21:40:36 -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=5fACvBwuYVzylJxLzXpExxnY+X37rJ9YPbGFHSHxCjA=; b=aS7UYae4SKhop3eQK84s3jPNV9C40nNy4mS0d7xfqeAAmMN8R9MocoksPO/CYbQRok 0B/AZefrBSS1vBQegoyVKd3S4SeEFK00l6w3Wk09mbHD1Qm/zJEE12SUbb6j26e/sSag BDWA/87c9W7xUhJHeTKO+2OcQjF1V/umYGc6iCHq1yRBLLMxa4uK3fKwFcyuLmH2U6d0 ha4qvY3q0tNprTVVoP9cY7iG0oBX+Dp2njE/77chNAf7bICPV3BpEpUB5Vx/EdK+1n6Z 6IJjEzSD5Zd55r0SBPzQG53NUX+RCGJEtjZHLKziCcCM+pfiS/+WOe8rbvAerURiE6gc 0vbQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.77.167 with SMTP id t7mr6240320wjw.27.1375332036154; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 21:40:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.15.68 with HTTP; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 21:40:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.15.68 with HTTP; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 21:40:35 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <E7C3026796D78841949FD2274E3A94620CBE5E05@HATMSG025.TMOUSERSUK.AD.T-MOBILE.CO.UK>
References: <201307091245.r69Cj0Q08784@ftpeng-update.cisco.com> <CAD6AjGSPgs8JzN7yuPUVSr1Pz5POY6JsMo0_33zK3Kn++RxBBQ@mail.gmail.com> <E7C3026796D78841949FD2274E3A94620CBE5E05@HATMSG025.TMOUSERSUK.AD.T-MOBILE.CO.UK>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 21:40:35 -0700
Message-ID: <CAD6AjGQgAS0JoWmgnA3U7-wATwN+Z7UMj4C17XEMX4y96AN4kg@mail.gmail.com>
From: "cb.list6" <cb.list6@gmail.com>
To: Nick Heatley <Nick.Heatley@ee.co.uk>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7bf0d628769c3d04e2db71e8"
Cc: draft-chen-v6ops-ipv6-roaming-analysis@tools.ietf.org, IPv6 Ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-chen-v6ops-ipv6-roaming-analysis
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 04:40:38 -0000

Hi Nick,

On Jul 30, 2013 9:55 AM, "Heatley, Nick" <Nick.Heatley@ee.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Hi Cameron,
>
> >
> > b.  dual-stack 1 PDP (v4v6) will not work any time soon.  Enabling
> this
> > feature in the HSS/HLR breaks roaming and there is no way to ensure
> > this issue is fixed in the hundreds of networks that are potentially
> > impacted.  There are some backs to do on the home network that can
> make
> > this easier but not exposing partner networks to the new release 8
> > features.
>
> [NH] Cameron I assume you referring to the issue of extended MAP (for
> Ipv4v6) causing exception at the visited operator's network?

Yes

Thanks for
> highlighting this issue. I guess I would like to know if the number of
> problem operators is significant, or a few isolated cases. Do you or

We saw a widespread issue in the 10 minutes before we rolled back the
changes.

> anyone have information to infer this is widespread or systemic? If it

The vendors gear / involved is highly deployed, afaik

> is unknown lets acknowledge it as such.
> If cases are isolated, then there may be operational actions a dual
> stack operator can take; for sake of argument, a roaming steering
> solution could be applicable to blacklist a problem operator and steer
> the outbound roamers away before the exception occurs.

Well, there is money involved in steering. Money is usually top of mind
for  the folks  involved,  not v6.

> I have not yet arrived at the conclusion that ipv4v6 roaming cannot be
> made to work, but perhaps I haven't seen the extent of the problem?

I am sure it can be made to work, I am just noting there is operational
risk. I know because we hit it, but  our ops folks had the presence of mind
to roll back quickly

In the long run, we plan to have whitelist for the v4v6 extended
attribute,  but HLR features are on an 18 month cycle for us.  We would
like all our apns to support any combination  of v4, v4v6, or v6. But we
can only safely support v4 or v6 in 2013.  In the 2nd half of 2014, we may
be able to try v4v6 again.

CB

> Regards,
> Nick
> NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER
> This e-mail (including any attachments) is intended for the above-named
person(s).  If you are not the intended recipient, notify the sender
immediately, delete this email from your system and do not disclose or use
for any purpose.
>
> We may monitor all incoming and outgoing emails in line with current
legislation. We have taken steps to ensure that this email and attachments
are free from any virus, but it remains your responsibility to ensure that
viruses do not adversely affect you.
>
> Everything Everywhere Limited
> Registered in England and Wales
> Company Registered Number: 02382161
> Registered Office Address: Hatfield Business Park, Hatfield,
Hertfordshire, AL10 9BW