RE: 3gpp scenario 2

["Thakur, Anand" <Anand.Thakur@hpsglobal.com>]

Hi Luc,
I totally agree that configured tunneling is very boring and time consuming
but in this case you will have to set up only one configured tunnel to the
6bone/v6 internet. From there on it will be the responsibility of the 6bone
to send you back a legitimate reply ;-)
But the question remains, how do you know that HOST B is V6 and not V4?
Being in a V6 island you should be able to maintain connectivity with the V4
world also. If you generate a dual query (one to the 6bone and one to the V4
internet) and get a blank from the V4 net, then what? Do you wait for the
6bone reply? But most clients would accept the answer that they get first.

regards
Anand Thakur
HCL Perot Systems (A SEI CMM Level 5 Company)
Plot No 3, Sector 125, NOIDA (UP)-201301, India
* Tel  +91 120 4432755-79, X3348 (EPABX)
mobile:9811748512

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	BELOEIL Luc FTRD/DMI/CAE [SMTP:luc.beloeil@rd.francetelecom.com]
> Sent:	Tuesday, December 17, 2002 5:22 PM
> To:	juha.wiljakka@nokia.com; Anand.Thakur@hpsglobal.com
> Cc:	v6ops@ops.ietf.org
> Subject:	RE : 3gpp scenario 2
> 
> Hi Juha and Anand,
>  
> Can you clarify: "What if we already have some static "IPv6 in IPv4"
> tunnels configured from the operator's network to, say, IPv6 internet /
> 6bone and there is IPv6 connection to node B?"
> 
> My small experience shows that configuring static tunnels becomes quickly
> boring. I would prefer a 6to4-based solution. But it seems that security
> issues are remaining... I have to check that.
> 
> Luc
> 
> 
> 	-------- Message d'origine-------- 
> 	De: juha.wiljakka@nokia.com [mailto:juha.wiljakka@nokia.com] 
> 	Date: mar. 17/12/2002 12:23 
> 	À: Anand.Thakur@hpsglobal.com 
> 	Cc: v6ops@ops.ietf.org 
> 	Objet: RE: 3gpp scenario 2
> 	
> 	
> 
> 	Anand,
> 	
> 	I assume that this is a very common problem / environment in initial
> IPv6 deployment, i.e. two separate IPv6 islands connected by IPv4 network
> using "IPv6 in IPv4" tunneling and solutions have already been thought by
> several (DNS) experts.
> 	
> 	What if we already have some static "IPv6 in IPv4" tunnels
> configured from the operator's network to, say, IPv6 internet / 6bone and
> there is IPv6 connection to node B?
> 	
> 	I am very happy to receive more comments on this issue.
> 	
> 	Thanks,
> 	        -Juha-
> 	
> 	-----Original Message-----
> 	From: ext Thakur, Anand [ <mailto:Anand.Thakur@hpsglobal.com>]
> 	Sent: 17 December, 2002 13:01
> 	To: Wiljakka Juha (NMP/Tampere)
> 	Cc: V6ops (E-mail)
> 	Subject: 3gpp scenario 2
> 	
> 	
> 	hi huha,
> 	i was just wondering about the scenario in which 2 IPV6 UEs
> communicate over
> 	an IPV4 network. In this scenario won't initial DNS resolution be a
> very
> 	difficult job (if not impossible)?
> 	If you have not understood my question read this example:
> 	Let Host A be on IPV6 netork X and Host B on IPV6 network Y. Now, if
> A makes
> 	a DNS query ("A") for B, none of the name resolvers in network X
> will have
> 	an entry for B . How will this query finally reach network Y,
> assuming all
> 	intermediate routers are IPV4 only? Will A have to explicitly tunnel
> this
> 	request to network Y? I am also assuming that DNS servers in the
> IPV4
> 	internet don't support "AAAA".
> 	
> 	regards
> 	Anand Thakur
> 	HCL Perot Systems (A SEI CMM Level 5 Company)
> 	Plot No 3, Sector 125, NOIDA (UP)-201301, India
> 	* Tel  +91 120 4432755-79, X3348 (EPABX)
> 	mobile:9811748512
> 	
> 	
> 	
>