Are IPv6-only Internet services viable today?

Fri Jan 15 17:26:33 UTC 2010

On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 5:37 AM, Durand, Alain
<alain_durand at cable.comcast.com> wrote:
> [resending with more readable, apologies for the duplicate]
>
> DS-lite can work both for fixed and wireless scenario, where you have a
> laptop/pda/smarphone/tablet
> that is only configured by the access network with IPv6 but want to access
> IPv4 content FROM IPv4
> applications. This is the main difference between DS-lite and NAT64. NAT64

Agreed, DS-lite can be deployed in many environments.  But, a 3GPP
style mobile operators would have to be working under some very
specific circumstances to choose DS-lite given that dual-stack
features (IPv6 PDP before release 7 and dual-stack EPS bearer after
release 8) have long been part of the standards and ecosystem without
the need for DS-lite.  But, honestly, i am trying to focus this thread
on viable services that can be launched and supported today or the
very near future with IPv6-only, not a religious war about technology
selection.

> requires all applications
> on the user device to be IPv6 compatible. Now, that may or may not be an
> issue. If you are talking
> about a proprietary wireless device that run only proprietary apps, porting
> all those apps to IPv6
> prior to launching the service may be ok... However, if the device can run
> external apps, like those
> coming from an app store, or running pre-existing apps (I’m thinking about
> the gazillions apps
> existing on the iPhone), then a NAT64 solution will force a complete rewrite
> of every single one
> of those apps...

The purpose of me posting the video was to show that a casual internet
user (majority of my customers) can have a normal user experience with
an IPv6-only transport on today's network with today's software.  No
special configuration required or special software to install.  Every
part of the environment i demonstrated is stock off-the shelf that
anyone can deploy today.  I work in a mobile operator, i know the
traffic profiles, and I won't be scared by FUD about billions of apps
that power-users may be using.  I am not saying you are pushing FUD,
but i bet you are familiar with some folks that do push FUD citing
indefinite support for IPv4 apps on cell phones.  Nonetheless, I will
have a service plan to meet their needs for native dual-stack.
Smart-phones generally have a life span of less than 2-3 years, and i
am not focused on legacy support.  IPv4 is not going away soon, i want
to talk about new products and services.  My question to the community
is regarding the viability of specific service for casual Internet
user to have web and email via an IPv6-only network.  Web and email is
the vast majority of my traffic, and maybe yours too.  Beyond web and
email (supported by NAT64), with an IPv6-only native service i can
offer the customer true end-to-end IPv6 which may spur a watershed of
innovation in the application and content space that is currently
hobbled by NAT and will be further hobbled by CGN (including NAT64).
I say this because as a network operator with CGN already in place,
the more traffic i can shift to innovative end-to-end IPv6 flows the
more money i save in CGN costs.

>
> DS-lite would enable all those apps to keep working. Big difference.
>

If a user needs dual stack in a 3GPP network, i have the technology to
do that today within today's 3GPP specs.  Software is deployed, I just
need market demand (or more likely supply side push from IPv6).  I
don't need yet another tunnel or piece of host software, it works
today.  Also, a big difference.  But, that's just my scenario.
DS-lite will work great and make sense in many environments.

- Cameron

>   - Alain.