Perhaps you could also include some more columns about the devices/softwares 
used to deliver IPv6:
-CPE (ie: SLAAC, DHCPv6, DS-Lite, etc…)
-core network (ie: Cisco ASR1000 NAT64 feature, etc…)
-software (ie: PowerDNS for DNS64, etc…)

I agree it’s sometimes sensible information as it may be the outcome of a long 
and painful work but some people may be willing to share that as it would 
promote those vendors and those specific softwares and it could send a message 
to those who are late in the game.

David Ponzone  Direction Technique
email: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
tel:      01 74 03 18 97
gsm:   06 66 98 76 34

Service Client IPeva
tel:      0811 46 26 26
www.ipeva.fr <blocked::http://www.ipeva.fr/>  -   www.ipeva-studio.com 
<blocked::http://www.ipeva-studio.com/>

Ce message et toutes les pièces jointes sont confidentiels et établis à 
l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires. Toute utilisation ou diffusion non 
autorisée est interdite. Tout message électronique est susceptible 
d'altération. IPeva décline toute responsabilité au titre de ce message s'il a 
été altéré, déformé ou falsifié. Si vous n'êtes pas destinataire de ce message, 
merci de le détruire immédiatement et d'avertir l'expéditeur.




> Le 19 mai 2016 à 09:18, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email protected]> a 
> écrit :
> 
> Hi Colin, Marco,
> 
> Very good points. I think to make it easy, I’m going to create an online 
> survey, not sure if today or tomorrow, I will have the time to make it.
> 
> I will post the link on the list.
> 
> Regards,
> Jordi
> 
> 
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: ipv6-wg <[email protected]> en nombre de Marco Hogewoning 
> <[email protected]>
> Responder a: <[email protected]>
> Fecha: jueves, 19 de mayo de 2016, 7:40
> Para: Colin Petrie <[email protected]>
> CC: <[email protected]>
> Asunto: Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 residential service: What prefix, static, dynamic, 
> extra cost ?
> 
>>> Hi Jordi,
>>> 
>>> That could be a useful list to have somewhere, thanks for that.
>>> 
>>>> On 19 May 2016, at 00:22, Colin Petrie <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On 18/05/16 20:45, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
>>>>> So here are the questions for actual IPv6 services providers to 
>>>>> residential customers:
>>>>> 1) What prefix size is provided?
>>>>> 2) Is that prefix static or dynamic?
>>>>> 3) In case is dynamic, there is a chance for static?
>>>>> 4) Any extra cost for having it static, or having a bigger prefix (i.e., 
>>>>> /48 instead of /56)?
>>>>> 5) If the customer has already a static IPv4 with a monthly charge, is 
>>>>> still IPv6 static prefix being charged on top of that?
>>>> 
>>>> A related question that is not on the list above:
>>>> 6) Can the customer delegate reverse DNS for the assigned IPv6 prefix?
>>>> 6a) If the prefix is static, can they use an NS delegation?
>>>> 6b) If the prefix is dynamic, can they consistently DNAME it to a
>>>> customer-hosted zone that contains PTRs for 'some-subnet-size'?
>>>> 
>>>> Of course, most residential customers probably don't care. But I mention
>>>> it as both a DNS and IPv6 geek. It's something to consider.
>>> 
>>> Would it be a lot of work to add 2 or 3 columns regarding the IPv4 support?
>>> 
>>> 7) Do you still provide native IPv4 support?
>>> 7a) globally routable address? yes/no, static/dynamic?
>>> 7b) NAT444 (CGN) or DS-lite
>>> 7c) NAT64 or 464-Xlat
>> 
>> Still early, sorry for the reply to self.
>> 
>> Maybe it is useful if it is organised based on type of network: 
>> wireless/wireline and/or carrier (cable, DSL, wifi, GSM). There might be 
>> differences in type of service based on the carrier.
>> 
>> Marco
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> **********************************************
> 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 
> confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the 
> individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware 
> that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this 
> information, including attached files, is prohibited.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ***********************************************************************************************************
> Le service MailSecure d'IPeva confirme l'absence de virus et de spam dans ce 
> message.
> ***********************************************************************************************************
> 
> 

Reply via email to