This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/ipv6-wg@ripe.net/
[ipv6-wg] IPv6 only network at RIPE 68
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] IPv6 only network at RIPE 68
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] IPv6 only network at RIPE 68
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Marco Sommani
marco.sommani at cnr.it
Tue May 20 09:00:33 CEST 2014
On 20/mag/2014, at 02:06, Tore Anderson <tore at fud.no> wrote: > * Philip Homburg > >> Note, I'm talking about the proposal to make the detault meeting >> network support 464XLAT. I don't think there is any proposal to make >> the default meeting network IPv6-only (i.e. without any support for >> IPv4) > > I don't think you can say that "the network support supports 464XLAT" > as 464XLAT consists of two components, of which only one (the PLAT, or > in other words the NAT64 gateway) is implemented in the network. The > other component, the CLAT, is located on the end-user device itself. Not necessarily. This picture, taken from rfc6877, shows the general 464XLAT scenario: +------+ | v6 | | host | +--+---+ | .---+---. / \ / IPv6 \ | Internet | \ / `----+----' | +------+ | .---+---. .------. | v6 +---+ +------+ / \ +------+ / \ | host | | | | / IPv6 \ | | / IPv4 \ +------+ +---+ CLAT +---+ Network +---+ PLAT +---+ Internet | +--------+ | | | \ / | | \ / | v4p/v6 +-+ +------+ `---------' +------+ `----+----' | host | | | +--------+ | +--+---+ +------+ | | v4g | | v4p +---+ | host | | host | | +------+ +------+ | <- v4p -> XLAT <--------- v6 --------> XLAT <- v4g -> v6 : Global IPv6 v4p : Private IPv4 v4g : Global IPv4 Figure 1: Wireline Network Topology The CLAT must not necessarily stay on end-user devices, because it may also be in a box at the border of a dual-stack customer network. On the other hand, I have to agree that this setup is useless for the purpose of offering to participants the experience of an IPv6-only world (actually, they would continue to experience dual-stack). On the other hand, this setup could be useful to convince the operators that, even if they eliminate IPv4 from their backbones, their customers may still continue to have IPv4 as usual. -- Marco Sommani Via Contessa Matilde 64C 56123 Pisa - Italia phone: +390500986728 mobile: +393487981019 fax: +390503869728 email: marcosommani at gmail.com -- Marco Sommani Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche Istituto di Informatica e Telematica Via Giuseppe Moruzzi 1 56124 Pisa - Italia work: +390506212127 mobile: +393487981019 fax: +390503158327 mailto:marco.sommani at cnr.it
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] IPv6 only network at RIPE 68
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] IPv6 only network at RIPE 68
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]