IPv6 mistakes, was: Re: Looking for an IPv6 naysayer...
joelja at bogus.com
Sat Feb 12 00:27:06 CST 2011
On 2/11/11 6:31 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Feb 2011, Tom Limoncelli wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>>> I think you'll be in for a surprise here, too. The 4G transition is
>>> already underway. For the vendors where 4G means LTE, IPv6 is the
>>> native protocol and IPv4 requires a certain amount of hackery to
>> I'm writing an article where I want to say that but I can't find an
>> article I can reference to back it up.
> We're an LTE operator and this is the first time I've heard about this.
> LTE supports IPv4 and IPv6 and as far as I can discern, that is a
> requirement, and there is no "hackery" to get IPv4 running.
3gpp release 8 and later does not throw out the baby with the bathwater.
v6 only contexts are certainly supported however and we know for a fact
that there are certain entities that will use that in short order.
> We have yet to see any LTE terminals (USB dongels so far) that support
> IPv6. There are a lot of other kinks to work out first, going IPv6 only
> here is definitely not the place. Remember, a lot of people buying this
> service is taking the USB dongle and attaching it to their corporate XP
The current verizon lte sticks (sourced lg and pantech) do in fact
provide v6 connectivity as do some of the embedded mini pci-e cards.
I note with some entertainment for the future of mobile walled gardens
the last bullet point on this page everytime I see it:
More information about the NANOG