[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-v6ops-incremental-cgn



Mohacsi Janos  -  le (m/j/a) 5/20/09 11:05 AM:



On Wed, 20 May 2009, Rémi Després wrote:

Mohacsi Janos  -  le (m/j/a) 5/20/09 9:52 AM:

According to our findings in our IPv6 deployment:
- deploying IPv6 on backbone network is easy and relatively painless
- deploying IPv6 on access network is not obvious, but can be done in scalable way - deploying IPv6 at customers is very painful - very conservative application owners are hindering of introducing IPv6 even when their application cannot support it....

- deploying IPv6 at home has showstoppers: no IPv6 capable CPE under 100 USD. After introducing such a device - at least 10 years is necessary to the users to replace older devices.....

I suggest a look at draft-despres-6rd-03 (soon to become an informational RFC). Thanks to the 6rd idea, Free, the second largest Internet provider in France with millions of residential customers, has offered IPv6 to its home sites at no extra charge since December 2007. I use IPv6 on a regular basis for Google access, GoogleMap, document access on IETF servers etc.

In my understanding, BitTorrent on Free's network works better in IPv6 than in IPv4 because hosts can receive incoming calls without limitations caused by IPv4 NATs.


I very much aware 6rd solution - we discussed it on the IETF 72. The most important drawbacks:
- requires providider control over the CPE devices.

True (but more a provisional limitation than drawback.

It could be improved the 6rd prefix made available via some method (.e.g DHCP) for generic CPE devices + persuade CPE vendors to implement this solution

Absolutely.

I participated in private discussions in this direction in San Francisco in March. As far as I know, Mark Townsley is planning to submit a draft to this effect.

Best regards,

RD