[180265] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: AWS Elastic IP architecture
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Fri May 29 21:07:21 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAL9jLabsO6btVCGKN_ty38WYiGSuAd4qz6bp58BUCWqY2GDi7g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 18:04:25 -0700
To: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
Cc: luan.nguyen@dimensiondata.com, "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
> On May 29, 2015, at 8:23 AM, Christopher Morrow =
<morrowc.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
>=20
> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 3:45 AM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
>> Yeah, if it were LISP, they could probably handle IPv6.
>=20
> why can't they do v6 with any other encap?
That=E2=80=99s not my point.
> the encap really doesn't matter at all to the underlying ip protocol
> used, or shouldn't... you decide at the entrance to the 'virtual
> network' that 'thingy is in virtual-network-5 and encap the packet...
> regardless of ip version of the thing you are encapsulating.
Whatever encapsulation or other system they are using, clearly they =
can=E2=80=99t do IPv6 for some reason because they outright refuse to =
even offer so much as a verification that IPv6 is on any sort of roadmap =
or is at all likely to be considered for deployment any time in the =
foreseeable future.
So, my point wasn=E2=80=99t that LISP is the only encapsulation that =
supports IPv6. Indeed, I didn=E2=80=99t even say that. What I said was =
that their apparent complete inability to do IPv6 makes it unlikely that =
they are using an IPv6-capable encapsulation system. Thus, it is =
unlikely they are using LISP. I only referenced LISP because it was =
specifically mentioned by the poster to whom I was responding.
Please try to avoid putting words in my mouth in the future.
Owen
