[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: WG Last Call: 3GPP Analysis Document
Soliman Hesham wrote:
> Trying to achieve seamless connectivity between v6-only nodes
> and legacy v4 nodes for those applications requiring end-to-end
> IP connectivity seems to me a non starter. If this was possible
> to make this work and scale, there will be no need for
> IPv6, period.
=> Hmm. It's not meant to really scale, more below.
>
> The analysis document is making the point that:
> "It is assumed that the solution described here is used
> for limited
> cases, in which
> communications with a small number of legacy IPv4 SIP
> equipment are
> needed."
> However, this claim is not substanciated.
> If it is the case that such communications are only required in
> limited environments,
> why not recommending that those environments upgrade to v6?
=> I'd love to do that. However, how does this happen in
practice? Let's say 3GPP went with IPv6 only and 3GPP2
did dual stack or IPv4 only for their IMS. And let's
say that some operators decide to enable IPv4 only
in their 3GPP2 networks, or in their fixed broadband
networks. Now a 3GPP operator has three options:
1. Tell the others to upgrade to v6
2. Tell its subscribers that they can't contact certain
networks.
3. Provide a mechanism that allows subscribers to talk
to those v4 only people.
1) is unrealistic. If it can be done, then why hasn't
it been done already? 2) doesn't seem realistic either
from a commercial point of view
I'm a bit confused here. The voice communication using standard
technology would still work fine, right?
So, this is only the value-added services, SIP-driven
that won't work between 3GPP & 3GPP2, right?
So, are you not trying to solve a social problem here instead
of a technical one?
Also, if this is the scenario that you are trying to solve,
as 3GPP & 3GPP2 are targeting very large deployment,
I have a hard time to undestand your comment:
"It's not meant to really scale"
- Alain.