IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v4tov6transition] draft-arkko-ipv6-transition-guidelines WGLC

<satoru.matsushima@tm.softbank.co.jp> Thu, 02 September 2010 03:03 UTC

Return-Path: <satoru.matsushima@tm.softbank.co.jp>
X-Original-To: v4tov6transition@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v4tov6transition@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A80A53A68BF for <v4tov6transition@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 20:03:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 3.103
X-Spam-Level: ***
X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.103 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.440, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hXqVoCtHIyZP for <v4tov6transition@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 20:03:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bb.softbank.co.jp (m1.bb.softbank.co.jp [210.146.18.150]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91F873A68CF for <v4tov6transition@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 20:03:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from CI-EXHB-01.bb.local (10.241.1.2) by m1.bb.softbank.co.jp (210.146.18.150) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.247.2; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 12:04:01 +0900
Received: from CI-EXMB-11V.bb.local ([fe80::20ae:f78b:95d5:42bd]) by CI-EXHB-01.bb.local ([::1]) with mapi; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 12:04:00 +0900
From: satoru.matsushima@tm.softbank.co.jp
To: remi.despres@free.fr, fred@cisco.com, jari.arkko@piuha.net
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 12:03:19 +0900
Thread-Topic: draft-arkko-ipv6-transition-guidelines WGLC
Thread-Index: ActI9B5iYW86lWBxRgeC9CMPGGWX9gBUsRdw
Message-ID: <6E4969D65A8E834A89C62CB8CD09E82901366221@CI-EXMB-11V.bb.local>
In-Reply-To: <475258F5-21FB-46C6-9BBA-7A1275D339F1@free.fr>
Accept-Language: ja-JP
Content-Language: ja-JP
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: ja-JP
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: v6ops@ops.ietf.org, v4tov6transition@ietf.org, kurtis@kurtis.pp.se
Subject: Re: [v4tov6transition] draft-arkko-ipv6-transition-guidelines WGLC
X-BeenThere: v4tov6transition@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <v4tov6transition.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v4tov6transition>, <mailto:v4tov6transition-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v4tov6transition>
List-Post: <mailto:v4tov6transition@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v4tov6transition-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v4tov6transition>, <mailto:v4tov6transition-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 03:03:36 -0000

Hi Remi, Fred and Jari,

FYI,
SPs in Japan, BBIX, Internet Multifeed, JPIX and IIJ-II unveil the intention of 
adopting SAM/4rd as a solution for their IPv4 service over IPv6 native network.

We then support including Remi's helpful comment for section 4.3 in the draft.

Please take look at these joint press release.

BBIX:
http://www.bbix.net/press/file/press_20100831.pdf

Internet Multifeed:
http://www.mfeed.co.jp/press/2010/pdf/20100831.pdf

JPIX:
http://www.jpix.ad.jp/jp/pdf/20100831_001.pdf

IIJ-II:
http://www.iij.ad.jp/news/pressrelease/2010/0831.html


Since these documents are written in Japanese originally, English page does not 
available by now. So please read these with online translation service (not sure that quality), 
or find your friend who can read Japanese. Sorry for that inconvenience.

--
Satoru Matsushima


 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rémi Després [mailto:remi.despres@free.fr] 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2010 7:06 PM
> To: Fred Baker; Jari Arkko
> Cc: IPv6 v6ops; Kurt Erik Lindqvist; Ron Bonica; 
> v4tov6transition@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: draft-arkko-ipv6-transition-guidelines WGLC
> 
> Hi Fred, hi Jari,
> 
> Sorry for the late answer.
> 1.
> The main issue I see is the need for a better balance between 
> dual stack throughout and IPv6 across IPv4 infrastructures as 
> recommended approaches for rapid deployments.
> The latter approach is more recent (with RFC 5569 and RFC 
> 5969 issued in January and August 2010 respectively) but, as 
> it proved to be the preferred one by a number of ISPs for 
> their first deployment, it should be documented as such.
> 2.
> Also, there appears a converging interest for 4rd, the 
> reverse of 6rd for IPv4 connectivity across IPv6-only ISP 
> infrastructures (draft-vautrin-softwire-4rd-00 and 
> draft-despres-softwire-sam-01 sec. 3.2).
> As it is a potential alternative or complement to DS-lite, 
> that some ISPs can consider, and that at least one does 
> consider on a confidential basis, it should IMHO be 
> mentioned. (Of course it shouldn't be hidden that the 
> specification is still much less advanced than that of DS-lite).      
> 
> Attached is a modified version of draft-06, in PDF and and in 
> .doc, in  which I propose an example text to cover these points.
> 
> Regards,
> RD
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email