[afripv6-discuss] IPv6 In South Africa

[Mark Tinka]

On Monday, January 16, 2012 03:27:47 PM Ahmed Abu-Abed 
wrote:

> FWIW, gogo6 license their CPE code for IPv6 transition
> mechanisms to other vendors CPEs. Their business focus
> is not to sell CPEs, which have very low margin, but the
> tunnel servers at ISP core that go with them. Each
> tunnel server can serve 50K CPEs or s/w clients (which
> are free).

I'm not concerned about gogo6's CPE marketing strategy. I'm 
only concerned about what it means for operators who are 
already having to deal with the regular CPE they are 
offering to their customers.

While some operators might not mind having to deal with 
multiple CPE's in the customer's homes, others would.

> As for NAT64/DNS64, all I have to say that this is a good
> idea, except that you need to turn OFF dual-stack on
> your PC ! NAT64 needs an IPv6-only host to work, and
> good luck trying to do that with todays operating
> systems that have apps with socket code and networks
> they need to connect to over IPv4.

You're missing the point, Ahmed. NAT64 doesn't not "need" a 
v6-only host "to work". It is v6-only hosts that need NAT64 
in order to talk to v4-only resources (and while it is 
obvious, I will just say it - v6-only hosts don't need NAT64 
to talk to v6-only or dual-stacked resources).

The point is that until there are no more v4 addresses left 
to assign to customers, NAT64 is pretty much useless. Hell, 
I won't be using NAT64 now because I still have a number of 
v4 addresses I can assign to new customers (however, we are 
testing NAT64 already and have it running).

NAT64 comes in "after" the final v4 address has been 
assigned to the last new customer. After that (again, with 
the exception of NAT44 or NAT444), v6 is the only address 
you can assign to any additional new customers. Once this 
happens, you need some kind of method to allow them to talk 
to the old v4 Internet. Among many ways, NAT64 is one.

To reiterate, we chose NAT64 because you don't need to 
migrate to v6 again, later on. Also, NAT64 only makes sense 
when there is no more v4 to assign, not before.

> So, practically, efficient tunneling is the best way for
> rapid transition for now.

Again, I'm talking about the final v4 assignment, not while 
we still have v4 today.

> And the more you shorten the
> tunnel, the more efficient it is.

This is not always possible. Some networks are just simply 
too large. You can only do the best you can do.

Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/afripv6-discuss/attachments/20120117/ce22d10b/attachment.bin