Re: [v6ops] sense of draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment

You only need IPv4 support if the other side of the communication is IPv4-only.

I read RFC6540, in this context as if the app, protocol, service, etc. will work if IPv4 is disabled.

So this is true in all the IPv6-only mechanisms, because precisely the idea is to make sure that if at some point there are no more "IPv4-only whatever", it will still work.

Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet

El 30/3/21 12:08, "v6ops en nombre de Alexandre Petrescu" <v6ops-bounces@ietf.org en nombre de alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> escribió:

    Le 30/03/2021 à 09:44, Giuseppe Fioccola a écrit :
    > Hi Alexandre, Yes, the main scope is to describe the global IPv6 
    > deployment and provide an overview on how the transition to IPv6 is 
    > progressing, indeed the draft is informational. Anyway, according to 
    > the statistics and to the surveys, it can be possible to make some 
    > general considerations and report transition challenges in order to 
    > encourage actions in the areas identified (e.g. section "Call for 
    > action").

    I agree.

    However, I have a doubt.  At a point this draft says:

        "It is recommended that all networking standards assume the use of
         IPv6 and be written so they do not require IPv4 ([RFC6540])."

    Incidentally, I agree with the recommendation, but it is still an
    advice.  If we want to not put an advice then we dont put it, end of phrase.

    Besides, the paragraph above sounds great, and I agree with it.  But it
    refers to RFC6540.  That RFC is great, and is a BCP.

    But in detail, it (RFC6540) says this, among other things that are ok:
    > To ensure interoperability and flexibility, the best practices are
    > as follows:
    > 
    [...]
    > 
    > o  New and updated IP networking implementations should support IPv4 
    > and IPv6 coexistence (dual-stack), but must not require IPv4 for 
    > proper and complete function.

    This requirement is great, but in practice, 464XLAT needs IPv4 in order 
    to work.  So the 'must not require IPv4 for proper and complete 
    function' is not respected.

    A smartphone that is qualified as 'IPv6-only' by many still has an IPv4 
    stack in it and still runs IPv4 software.

    That is a problem.

    This might represent a basis that - when shaken - goes up to the 'it is 
    recommended' of this draft that I mentioned earlier.

    Alex

    > 
    > Giuseppe
    > 
    > -----Original Message----- From: v6ops 
    > [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alexandre Petrescu
    > Sent: Monday, March 29, 2021 6:48 PM To: v6ops@ietf.org Subject:
    > [v6ops] sense of draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment
    > 
    > I wanted to ask whether the sense of the intention of 
    > draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment is:
    > 
    > - to describe deployment?
    > 
    > - or to give advice about what the deployment should be?
    > 
    > For my part, I think it should solely describe deployment.
    > 
    > Alex
    > 
    > _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list 
    > v6ops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
    > 

    _______________________________________________
    v6ops mailing list
    v6ops@ietf.org
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.