IPv6 beta support for Android phones

Mon Nov 7 05:31:48 UTC 2011

On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Tom Hill <tom at ninjabadger.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-11-04 at 15:04 -0700, Cameron Byrne wrote:
>> FYI.
>>
>> T-Mobile USA now has opt-in beta support for an Android phone on IPv6,
>> more info here https://sites.google.com/site/tmoipv6/lg-mytouch
>
> Very, very good. I hope T-Mobile UK (and elsewhere in the world) take
> heed.
>
> I have to wonder why they've chosen to go with IPv6-only & DNS/NAT64
> instead of a dual-stack approach. Is there a particular restriction that
> prevents this?
>

There are a variety of reasons.  Most prominent is that if the issue
is lack of IPv4 addresses (public and private), dual-stack does not
solve this problem, each device still gets an IPv4 address.  Another
major issue is that in GSM/UMTS (3GPP pre-release 9), having
dual-stack means having 2 attachments to the network,  one for v4 and
one for v6.  Most mobile providers pay for most of their network kit
in terms of these attachments known as PDP.  Consequently, dual-stack
doubles the of the packet-core network.  If we take the licensing and
contractual parts out of the equations, double the attachments means
double the signalling and mobility events ... resulting in double the
CPU / Memory / blah ...

LTE does not have the dual attachment problem since there is the
concept of having v4 and v6 in one attachment, but it does not change
the fact that there are not enough IPv4 addresses to go around,
especially from a strategic planning perspective (let's design this
once for 5 to 10+ year life ...)

>> As far as i know, this is the first Android phone that support IPv6 on
>> the GSM/UMTS mobile interface.  Previous version of Android phones
>> supported IPv6 on WiFi and LTE.
>
> Indeed, the 'Network Info II' application will show you the IPv6
> addresses gained on WiFi interfaces (if anyone's interested). My Galaxy
> S (unlocked/orig.) does this very well.
>
> I wonder if it's possible to provide IPv6 support for UMTS/GSM via
> firmware and/or software updates from Samsung?
>

That's a good question for Samsung.  Most vendors would rather have
you buy a new device :(

CB

> Tom
>
>
>