----- Original message ----- > > On Jan 15, 2010, at 7:53 PM, Jim Burwell wrote: > > > Sorry for late response here... > > > > On 1/14/2010 15:20, Cameron Byrne wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Jim Burwell <j...@jsbc.cc> wrote: > > > > > > > On 1/14/2010 11:10, Cameron Byrne wrote: > > > > > > > > > Folks, > > > > > > > > > > My question to the community is: assuming a network based IPv6 to IP4 > > > > > translator is in place (like NAT64 / DNS64), are IPv6-only Internet > > > > > services viable as a product today? In particular, would it be > > > > > appropriate for a 3G /smartphone or wireless broadband focused on at > > > > > casual (web and email) Internet users? Keep in mind, these users have > > > > > NAT44 today. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You may also want to read up on Dual Stack Lite (DS-Lite) > > > > <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-softwire-dual-stack-lite-02>, > > > > > > > I have looked at DS-lite very carefully. First, DS-Lite fits better > > > for cable operators since they have CPE and can have a DS-lite > > > function in the CPE that they control, and that in turn allows them to > > > provide IPv4, IPv6, and dual-stack to the end-host that they do not > > > control. DS-Lite does not fit as well for a mobile phones since it > > > would require a major change to the phone's OS. Second, DS-Lite > > > requires tunneling as well as translation, so it is one more piece of > > > overhead in addition to NAT64 solution. For me, i believe it is less > > > complex to manage a single stack IPv6 host with NAT64 translation than > > > a dual stack host, tunneling infrastructure, as well as NAT44 CGN, > > > which is what DS-lite requires. They both achieve the same result, > > > but I believe in the mobile space there is a quicker time to market as > > > well as more progress toward the end-goal of IPv6-only using NAT64 > > > than DS-lite. > > > > > I guess the choice here is between standing up and managing a NAT64 CGN > > + special DNS64 DNS server infrastructure, or a DS-Lite CGN + DS-Lite > > tunneling infrastructure (you'd be able to keep existing "vanilla" DNS > > servers). > > > > > As I understand DS-Lite, an IPv6-capable device is a DS-Lite capable device > without any modification. The DS-Lite Gateway does all the heavy lifting > to provide IPv4 services and do the NAT64 translation between the IPv6-only > end-user device (phone) and the IPv4 internet. > > Owen
ummm. An ipv6 device is not natively a ds-lite device. There is always a tunneling component which is generally after market client software (in the case of mobile devices) or some cpe function. If you are interested you can read the ietf draft. Assuming you have a ds-lite cpe, you can park dual-stack hosts behind it. But, it does not "just work" today like the demonstration i posted. > >
