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

"GT RAMIREZ, Medel G." <medel@globetel.com.ph> Thu, 18 July 2013 00:56 UTC

Return-Path: <medel@globetel.com.ph>
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 5B35121F8F4F for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 17:56:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.279
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.279 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.726, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RELAY_IS_203=0.994]
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 Cptq3HTfZScb for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 17:56:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp01.globetel.com.ph (smtp01.globetel.com.ph [203.177.192.181]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0A4F21F8E1F for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 17:56:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exgtbh01.globetel.com ([10.225.208.17]) by smtp01.globetel.com.ph (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r6I0uRfN015706; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 08:56:40 +0800
Received: from EXVSGT02.globetel.com ([10.225.208.145]) by exgtbh01.globetel.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 18 Jul 2013 09:02:39 +0800
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 09:02:38 +0800
Message-ID: <A5AD67DA1ACB9648831FD753485B2BFE22A28617@EXVSGT02.globetel.com>
In-Reply-To: <88b3974ae0dcc67770c6ba6e29e09c7f@greed.fud.no>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] new draft: draft-chen-v6ops-ipv6-roaming-analysis
Thread-Index: Ac6DUW7SwEoV4lC0TfKVep/c2PuVEAAAE91w
References: <201307091245.r69Cj0Q08784@ftpeng-update.cisco.com> <88b3974ae0dcc67770c6ba6e29e09c7f@greed.fud.no>
From: "GT RAMIREZ, Medel G." <medel@globetel.com.ph>
To: Tore Anderson <tore@fud.no>, v6ops@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Jul 2013 01:02:39.0363 (UTC) FILETIME=[7FB7C530:01CE8352]
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.10.8794, 1.0.431, 0.0.0000 definitions=2013-07-17_10:2013-07-17, 2013-07-17, 1970-01-01 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 ipscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=6.0.2-1305240000 definitions=main-1307170216
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, 18 Jul 2013 00:56:56 -0000

Hi,

Section 4.1 states: "Roaming to IPv4-only networks with IPv6 PDP/PDN
request would fail to get addresses."

In my experience, this is seldom (if ever) the case.

---> Same experience with other countries (specifically guys from
Sweden) visiting the Philippines *but* problems arises with the Billing
Systems (TAP format)
And it was immediately corrected....

Regards
Medel
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
-----Original Message-----
From: v6ops-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Tore Anderson
Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 8:44 AM
To: v6ops@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-chen-v6ops-ipv6-roaming-analysis

> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chen-v6ops-ipv6-roaming-analysis.

Section 4.1 states: "Roaming to IPv4-only networks with IPv6 PDP/PDN
request would fail to get addresses."

In my experience, this is seldom (if ever) the case.

My home network (Network Norway) supports IPv6 PDP context and in recent
years I've roamed in more European countries than I can enumerate from
the top of my head, in some Mid-East countries, in the U.S., and in
Japan. I've made a point out of trying all available PLMNs my phone can
see in the air, and I know for a fact that most of them are IPv4-only.
In spite of this I cannot recall last time I had a problem establishing
IPv6 connectivity when roaming. The way I see it, 3GPP IPv6 roaming is
one of those things that Just Works.

I'm not an expert on 3GPP network architecture, but as far as I've been
able to understand, the reason why this work is that the IPv6 gets
tunnelled back to my home network using GTP, and that the visited
network just considers the payload as "data" and doesn't really care
whether it is IPv4 or IPv6.

I'm sure there could be exceptions to the above. I've heard several
people suggest that Japan is particularly problematic in this regard -
but in my experience it Just Works there, too.

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

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is intended for the use of the individual or the entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, proprietary, confidential and exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and delete this E-mail message immediately.