Re: [v6ops] Enterprises won't deploy IPv6 for IPv6's sake (as they didn't IPv4, IPX, XNS, or DECNet)

["Templin, Fred L" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Joel,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: joel jaeggli [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2014 10:50 AM
> To: Templin, Fred L; Tim Chown
> Cc: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [v6ops] Enterprises won't deploy IPv6 for IPv6's sake (as they didn't IPv4, IPX, XNS, or
> DECNet)
> 
> On 1/9/14, 9:36 AM, Templin, Fred L wrote:
> >>> MPTCP?  A la Siri on iOS7 etc :)
> >>
> >> That won't get me to a mobile router - it only addresses the apps
> >> on the mobile itself.
> >
> > Should also say, I want my corporate assets to have a stable address
> > in the DNS that doesn't change even if the assets are mobile and
> > frequently changing their network point of attachment.
> 
> As a consumer, the mechanic by which my connectivity to my assets is
> rendered seamless is irrelevant, it's the doing it part that's important.

What AERO is suggesting is mobile networks that retain the same IPv6
addresses/prefixes wherever they happen to move to. So, if my tablet
is a mobile router that serves all of my other personal networked
devices for example, those devices all get stable IPv6 addresses.
Or, if maybe my airplane is a mobile router that changes its network
point of attachment frequently as it travels across continents, the
airline should still be able to address the airplane and all of its
addressable components.

I guess you are asking whether we need IPv6 routing and addressing
all the way out to the end systems or whether just getting to some
sort of middlebox "concentrator" is sufficient. I think that comes
down to whether we truly want IPv6 end-to-end.

Thanks - Fred
[e-mail]
 
> > Thanks - Fred
> > [e-mail]
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > v6ops mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
> >
>