Hi Nick,
On 12/2/09 8:40 AM, "Nick Heatley" <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 for your comments. I agree. Use IPv6 as a transport in all peer to peer applications and for non legacy applications. Regards Sri _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
