[195979] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 migration steps for mid-scale isp
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (JORDI PALET MARTINEZ)
Mon Sep 25 05:42:47 2017
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
X-Envelope-From: jordi.palet@consulintel.es
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 11:42:37 +0200
From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
To: <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1709231318530.18564@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Reply-To: jordi.palet@consulintel.es
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
There are several ISPs doing trials (thousands of users).
RFC6877 (464XLAT), section 4. Network Architecture, indicates clearly =E2=
=80=9CWireline Network Architecture can be used in situations where there
are clients behind the CLAT, regardless of the type of access service
-- for example, fiber to the home (FTTH), Data Over Cable Service
Interface Specification (DOCSIS), or WiFi.=E2=80=9D
Vendors confirmed two weeks ago they have implementations in CEs.
RFC7084 was created before all the new transition technologies (including 4=
64XLAT and MAP, for example, or even lw4o6 that has many advantages compare=
d to DS-LITE, being the same but requiring a much simpler CGN), so that=E2=
=80=99s why I=E2=80=99m working to update it (most probably as an =E2=80=9C=
accompanying document=E2=80=9D only for the transition part:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc7084-bis
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-palet-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-transition
New versions to be publish this week hopefully =E2=80=A6
Regards,
Jordi
=20
-----Mensaje original-----
De: NANOG <nanog-bounces@nanog.org> en nombre de Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike=
@swm.pp.se>
Organizaci=C3=B3n: People's Front Against WWW
Responder a: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
Fecha: s=C3=A1bado, 23 de septiembre de 2017, 13:22
Para: Fredrik Sallinen <fredrik.sallinen@gmail.com>
CC: <nanog@nanog.org>
Asunto: Re: IPv6 migration steps for mid-scale isp
On Sat, 23 Sep 2017, Fredrik Sallinen wrote:
=20
> Please correct me If I'm wrong, AFAIK 464XLAT works best with mobile
> networks and its not suitable for fixed broadband. right?
=20
It's most widely deployed in mobile networks, yes. There is nothing tha=
t=20
says it couldn't work anywhere else.
=20
However, in fixed networks with PPPoE the most commonly used model is d=
ual=20
stack with RFC7084 style routers.
=20
--=20
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
=20
**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company
This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or con=
fidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the i=
ndividual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, =
copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if p=
artially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be cons=
idered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware t=
hat any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this in=
formation, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibi=
ted, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the origin=
al sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
