Mexico to Stop IPv4 Address Assignments Starting 2011

[JORDI PALET MARTINEZ]

I think it depends on how you "disconnect" IPv4. We have real customers,
with networks of up to 5.000 sites, which do this: Take down IPv4 in the
core and access.

The trick is to keep dual stack in the LANs (even if the LANs use net10 and
NAT), so the "old" applications that are still only available with IPv4,
keep running. In order to do that, you need an automatic tunneling protocol.
For example, softwires, and in fact this is the reason we needed it.
Softwares is basically L2TP, so you can guess we are talking simply about
VPNs "on demand".

In order to keep most of the traffic as IPv6 within the network, the access
to the rest of the Internet, for example for http, is proxied by boxes (that
also do caching functions, as in many networks is done to proxy
IPv4-to-IPv4), but in our case to IPv4-to-IPv6.

What I will never do at this stage and probably for many years, is to drop
IPv4 from the LANs, unless I have a closed network and don't want to talk
with other parties across Internet, and I'm sure all my applications already
support IPv6.

This has been presented several times in different foras such RIR meetings.
And yes ... I'm already working on an ID to explain a bit more all the
details.

Regards,
Jordi




> De: Fred Baker <fred at cisco.com>
> Responder a: <ipv6-ops-bounces+jordi.palet=consulintel.es at lists.cluenet.de>
> Fecha: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 12:43:31 -0500
> Para: David Conrad <david.conrad at icann.org>
> CC: IPv6 Ops list <ipv6-ops at lists.cluenet.de>
> Asunto: Re: Mexico to Stop IPv4 Address Assignments Starting 2011
> 
> CERNET2, certain parts of the US Army, among others. I get this in
> v6ops in the form of "we want to turn off IPv4 and still carry IPv4
> traffic, let's build a transition strategy"; you can probably guess
> my standing reply.
> 
> There is a certain sense in which it makes sense; if like many of my
> customers you are planning an IPv6 address space request because
> there isn't adequate capacity for your IPv4 plans, the next question
> is "how do my IPv6 customers talk with my IPv4 customers". My
> standard response is "if it is important the the latter, have them
> turn up IPv6 in parallel with their IPv4". I do get asked, though,
> why not simply convert them to IPv6 and turn down IPv4.
> 
> I'm not that much of a zealot.
> 
> On Jun 28, 2007, at 8:25 AM, David Conrad wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>>> I am of the opinion that IPv4 will be with us for quite a while,
>>> and the widely-proposed IPv4 turn-down makes no business sense.
>> 
>> I agree.  Could you point me to an example of "the widely-proposed
>> IPv4 turn-down"?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> -drc




**********************************************
The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org

Bye 6Bone. Hi, IPv6 !
http://www.ipv6day.org

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.