Subject: Re: [3gv6] IPv4 depletion just happened

From: Scott W Brim <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 22:17:56 -0500

Cameron, you know more than perhaps any other operator about v6 and
transition. You're a contributor more than a consumer. No matter where it's
produced you'll be writing some of it.

[Sent from my mobile.]
On Feb 1, 2011 10:10 PM, "Cameron Byrne" <[email-masked]> wrote:

---

From: Hui Deng <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 20:07:29 +0800

Forward on behalf of [email-masked]

From:        "Ahmed Abu-Abed" <[email-masked]>
To:        "Scott W Brim" <[email-masked]>
Cc:        [email-masked]
Date:        02-02-11 11:36
Subject:        Re: [3gv6] IPv4 depletion just happened
Sent by:        [email-masked]
 ------------------------------

Please provide a link to the papers, it will be good to  know what is the
planned transition architecture.

Keep in mind many RIRs will likely run out of 'big'  blocks of IPv4 within 6
to 9 months, around October 2011. After that one, and  only one, assignment
of 1024 addresses (ie /22 of IPv4) will be made to each  operator from the
RIR's last /8, which is hardly enough to sustain growth if you  have a large
subscriber base. I think RIPE and APNIC are following this  policy.

///yes, we are well aware...

Practically, the implications are more nested NATing,  which may break a few
things, or getting out of public IPv4 completely and  assigning only public
IPv6 addresses to subscribers via NAT64/DNS64, or some  form of DS-Lite
v4-in-v6 tunneling. Will any of these schemes be  ready for
field implementation operators by Q3 2011 ?

///some of the above has been already implemented in the field in more than
1 mobile operators network. The most painful thing today is the readiness of
customer equipment. It is mostly not available (besides the 1 well know
vendor). When this one is in place, the service can be provided fairly quick
using some of the solutions you have mentioned. Though, obviously some
compromises will have to be made. There are also some areas in the mobile
deployments that are very shallow today, such as IPv6 in the roaming
scenarios.

Roman

*From:* Scott W Brim <[email-masked]>
*Sent:* Wednesday, February 02, 2011 5:01 AM
*To:* Hui Deng <[email-masked]>
*Cc:* Ahmed  Abu-Abed <[email-masked]> ; [email-masked]
*Subject:* Re: [3gv6] IPv4 depletion just happened

In case you hadn't heard, the GSMS has produced the first of two white
papers  on v4/v6 transition and coexistence, focusing mainly but not
exclusively on  interoperability.  This first paper is for end-to-end user
plane  traffic.  It is now in the hands of their "interworking and roaming
 experts" group, who will flesh out the details, produce the equivalent of a
 handbook, etc.  The second paper will be on the transport plane and local
 breakout. They will be working on that one through the Spring.

I am concerned about duplication of effort and confusion of results.   Could
you possibly work within GSMA?  They are the worldwide body that
 coordinates operational issues for almost all mobile operators.  If
 independent groups produce conflicting recommendations, they are the ones
who  will have to resolve the conflicts in any case.

The next face-to-face meeting is in Shanghai, the same week as the IETF.

Scott

[Sent from my mobile.]
On Feb 1, 2011 9:37 PM, "Hui Deng" <[email-masked]> wrote:
> please go ahead if any implemention needed and could  benefit for mobile
> network.
>
> regards,
>
>  -Hui
>
> 2011/2/1 Ahmed Abu-Abed <[email-masked]>
>
>>  Hello everyone,
>>
>> IPv4 depletion at the top registry level  just happened but this mail
list
>> has been very  quiet.
>>
>> Is there any interest on this mail list for  discussing implementing IPv6
>> over existing 3G & upcoming LTE  networks ?
>>
>> -Ahmed
>>
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>> 3gv6 mailing  list
>> [email-masked]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/3gv6
>>
>>
_______________________________________________
3gv6 mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/3gv6