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

[Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>]

Ed,

To your list of alternatives, please add
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-carpenter-softwire-sample

Regards
   Brian Carpenter

On 2010-08-28 07:16, Ed Jankiewicz wrote:
>  Not an endorsement, merely a data point:  I am currently using 6rd for
> IPv6 access as part of a trial deployment by Comcast.  The shipped me
> the 6rd-enhanced router, and it was plug-and-play.  If not for the
> dancing turtle (and Google and Facebook via IPv6) I would hardly notice
> a difference from my baseline service.  WFM, YMMV.
> 
> This is a methodology to consider if modification of CPE is reasonable
> in your network.  If not, there are variants being discussed that will
> work with unmodified CPE.
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5569
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5969
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-despres-softwire-6rdplus-00
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lee-softwire-6rd-udp-02
> 
> Ed J
> On 8/27/2010 12:43 PM, RÃmi DesprÃs wrote:
>> Le 25 aoÃt 2010 Ã 18:25, Fred Baker a Ãcrit :
>>> ...
>>> If you have an existing IPv4 network, Free.FR deployed an IPv6
>>> service in their existing IPv4 network using 6rd with a team of a
>>> couple of people and a month's time if I have the story straight.
>> Not in a month's time, to be accurate, but still in only 5 weeks!
>> IMHO, everyone involved in IPv6 deployment should be interested in
>> this story.
>> For more details:
>> - tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5569
>> - www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-58/content/presentations/ipv6-free
>>
>> Regards,
>> RD
>>
>>
>>> That involved almost no actual native IPv6; 6rd is an IPv6/IPv4
>>> tunnel infrastructure. But it allowed them to provide both IPv4 and
>>> IPv6 *services* to their customers while they took time to think
>>> about what they wanted to do natively. They can change their network
>>> under the hood, so to speak, an their own schedule.
>>>
>>> Changing the network under the hood - that is the process hardware
>>> and software audit and upgrade, proving out configurations, and
>>> applying them where needed. No intention to trivialize, but if one
>>> can separate "delivery of the service" from "deployment of the
>>> technology", it might make the road a little easier.
>>> ...
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> v4tov6transition mailing list
>> v4tov6transition@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v4tov6transition
> 
> _______________________________________________
> v4tov6transition mailing list
> v4tov6transition@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v4tov6transition
>