michael(_dot_)dillon(_at_)bt(_dot_)com wrote:
Unless I've missed something recent, the IETF did not do a
lot of work
on the scenario where IPv4 islands need to communicate over an IPv6
Internet, talking to both IPv4 and IPv6 services.
It is called dual-stack.
That seems to simply ignore the issue by saying, let there be IPv4
everywhere for those who need it. But if there are not enough
addresses to grow the IPv4 infrastructure, you can't have IPv4
everywhere.
The big question of course is: what exact problem do you want
to solve?
An IPv4 island, that is blissfully unaware of the IPv4 address
crunch until far too late, wants to avoid changing their network
but still maintain connectivity to both the IPv6 and the IPv4
Internet. They may have to connect to an IPv6 ISP (for instance
if their IPv4 ISP goes bankrupt or they move an office location)
or they may connect to an IPv4 ISP who peers with a dual-stack
ISP or 6PE ISP. How do they continue to access all Internet services
from their IPv4 island, regardless of whether or not the services
are using IPv6 only?
What is so difficult in going dual-stack? IPv4 is NATted, as it already
is at a lot of places, and IPv6 comes in there using a tunnel.
Most 'services' that people use over the internet, fall under either:
- HTTP -> Use a HTTP Proxy with both IPv4 & IPv6
- SMTP -> Use a SMTP server which supports both IPv4 & IPv6
Anything else? Not really. As such, which exact services do you want to
transition?
Note that this is rather similar to the question raised regarding
the IPv4 outage at an IETF meeting. How does an IPv4 laptop user
continue to function without interruption when only IPv6 Internet
access is available at an IETF meeting?
As your source address breaks the moment your connection is interrupted
your have an interruption already. But you probably mean so that they
can continue using service X, well first start by defining service X.
The generic answer is of course NAT-PT, but there is a big reason why we
don't want that. Another trick is totd and there are a number of these
transition functions which are already in place and in use for a long
long time.
As such the sole problem left, which is going to be resolved soon, is
DNS, we will finally have AAAA in the root, next step DNSSEC :)
[..]
Stating "I want to connect from IPv4 to IPv6", can mean a lot
of things, is this HTTP? SMTP? or do you really want a
generic solution?
A generic solution that will work for all TCP and UDP protocols.
NAT-PT, but NAT doesn't understand all the protocols, if it did, then we
would not have to go to IPv6 in the first place.
I don't believe that there is an IETF solution for this scenario
which I expect to be a very common scenario specifically because
transition to IPv6 is being triggered by an IPv4 address shortage
whose effects will be felt first in the network core and ripple
outward from there.
As you clearly believe that there is no such thing, then make a list of
all the things you have tried and where they fail to meet your
requirements. Then make a list of the requirements you are missing and
propose that we solve that problem.
Greets,
Jeroen
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf