Hi, Good day to you all. I hope you don't mind me commenting in your discussion. Could I ask you please to clarify whether you are discussing UE to UE applications or UE application to hosted App servers?
If it is UE to App server, then surely the App server will need to be dual stacked as a prerequisite? IMHO the reasons for why an app server can be IPv6-only are similar reasons to why IPv4 Port Address Translation breaks services - the need for nice unique realms of IP addressing - does that make the use case of IPv4 legacy UE to IPv6 only App server academic (assuming all GI-DSL and P-NAT ultimately require some flavour of port address translation)? I doubt anyone in the operator's network or externally will create an IPv6 only App server just for the sake of it; which I guess supports Alain's and Sri's conclusion previously. UE to UE is a little different I guess, so is this the driver Hui? Hui, if you are considering UE to UE do you know of any UE to UE applications implemented today? Is the key use case (and differentiator) the UE to UE use case with mixed IPv6 and legacy IPv4-bound apps? To be honest my personal thought is that we could drive UE to UE to be via IPv6 Apps at the UE and an IPv6 bearer only; is this wrong? Thanks and Regards, Nick T-Mobile -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Hui Deng Sent: 02 December 2009 15:36 To: Sri Gundavelli Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Softwires] Host based translation: v4-v6 we have multiple reasons to do this, there are lots of operator are planning to do IPv6 only, most of people already see that. one key point, we are doing IPv6, not IPv4, you are proposing that let's support IPv4, and assign them unlimited IPv4 address. finally nobody use IPv6. Thanks -Hui 2009/12/2 Sri Gundavelli <[email protected]>: > I agree. When there is a case of v4 legacy app unable to use IPv6 transport > for what ever reasons, its rather better to go enable IPv4 on the peer, > still supporting IPv6-only network over dual-stack lite network. Or, modify > the app to use IPv6 transport and avoid the huge cost and management of > dealing with a modified stack and on all OS variants. We are mainly mixing a > true legacy requirement with new requirements which are debatable. > > > Sri > > > On 12/1/09 9:04 AM, "Durand, Alain" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Why go through all that trouble when you could make the server app > dual-stack capable in the first place? > That could be done with or without assigning a unique v4 address to it, > simply running v4 over v6... > Not you'd be back to a v4 app talking to a v4 app on hosts only having v6 > addresses configured natively. > > - Alain. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Softwires mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires > > _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires T-Mobile (UK) Limited Company Registered Number: 02382161 Registered Office Address: Hatfield Business Park, Hatfield, Hertfordshire, AL10 9BW Registered in England and Wales NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER This email (including attachments) is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, notify the sender immediately, delete this email from your system and do not disclose or use for any purpose. _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
