Subject: RE: [Softwires] IPv4 over IPv6 in Hubs and Spokes?

From: "Ed Koehler Jr" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 07:09:40 -0500

Folks:

As time progresses and IPv6 (hopefully) becomes mainstream, the
requirement for dual stack will shift from newer IPv6 hosts (for
backwards compatibility (today and near future) to IPv4 hosts that wish
to have connectivity to the next generation Internet (more distant
future). IPv4 will not be going away any time soon. It will most
probably be around for the rest of our lifetimes, but its precedence
will shift. I could even foresee ten years or more out where you will
find pockets of IPv4. The concept of islands consequently will shift
from IPv6 to IPv4. As this shift occurs (and will need to be supported),
there will be a corresponding shift in tunneling as well as the dual
stack requirements that I refer to above.

As a result, I think that both aspects should be covered.

Just my thoughts...

Edwin C. Koehler
 
Nortel
Real Time Networks & IPv6
Enterprise CTO Group
97 Humboldt Street
Rochester, New York  14609
Office:  585.654.2323  ESN 432.2323
Fax:     585.654.2500
Mobile: 585.230.0505
SIP and email: [email-masked]

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
Behalf Of JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 4:27 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Softwires] IPv4 over IPv6 in Hubs and Spokes?

Hi Spencer,

I guess that's me ;-)

I believe there is no reason to not have that drawing and on the other
way around, if the draft includes also IPv4-in-IPv6, we must have it, to
make it more clear. Not ?

I only realized that we missed that when I did one of the last reviews,
but it should have been there since the beginning !

Regards,
Jordi

> De: Spencer Dawkins <[email-masked]>
> Responder a: <[email-masked]>
> Fecha: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 19:54:32 -0600
> Para: Softwires Mailing List <[email-masked]>
> Asunto: [Softwires] IPv4 over IPv6 in Hubs and Spokes?
> 
> One Problem Statement reviewer pointed out that all of the examples in

> Figure 1 of the problem statement transit an IPv4 network between 
> softwire initiator and softwire consolidator, and offered a drawing of

> a fourth example that uses IPv4 over IPv6 transit.
> 
> Before I add this to the Problem Statement, does anyone actually have 
> this problem? All of the the IPv4 over IPv6 discussion I've seen has 
> been for the Mesh application - please let me know if I am missing 
> some background here (it has happened :-)
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Spencer
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Softwires mailing list
> [email-masked] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires

**********************************************
The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org

Barcelona 2005 Global IPv6 Summit
Slides available at:
http://www.ipv6-es.com

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.

_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email-masked] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires

_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires

---

From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 13:34:50 +0100

Hi Ed,

Actually there are already some networks with are already *only* IPv6 in the
access and the backbone (not in the LAN, which I will never recommend at
lest for tens of years). When we started the v6tc work, which somehow is the
precursor of softwires, we had this cases in mind.

Right now I can name 3 networks on this situation and they are big, from
5.000 to 8.500 end sites.

This seems to be also the case for the scenarios coming for some defense
networks.

The point is that when you have a lot of IPv6-dominant traffic, within your
a given network, and only few IPv4 exchange with Internet, or only mainly
for a few specific protocols, such as http, and you do that via proxy/cache
devices, then is easy (as we already did), to install a proxy which does a
protocol translation (and this is the only case where I will accept a
translation, because the end-to-end is already lost because the proxy, so we
don't break anything that is not already broken).

At this way, you operate a single stack (IPv6) core and access network,
which has some advantages (cost, O&M) , and only those applications that
aren't ported to IPv4 will need to use softwires (which are the minority in
our specific cases).

Regards,
Jordi

> De: Ed Koehler Jr <[email-masked]>
> Fecha: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 07:09:40 -0500
> Para: <[email-masked]>
> Conversación: [Softwires] IPv4 over IPv6 in Hubs and Spokes?
> Asunto: RE: [Softwires] IPv4 over IPv6 in Hubs and Spokes?
> 
> Folks:
> 

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.