Verizon DSL moving to CGN

Rajiv Asati (rajiva) rajiva at cisco.com
Mon Apr 8 21:38:15 UTC 2013


Hi Tom,

Good question. 

The End-user IPv6 prefix can be constructed using whatever techniques
independent of MAP etc. in any deployment requiring IPv4 address sharing.

What is interesting is that the MAP enabled CPE could parse certain bits
of that IPv6 prefix to mean something for MAP. That's it. Attached is a
screenshot to illustrate this very point.

Cheers,
Rajiv

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Taylor <tom.taylor.stds at gmail.com>
Date: Monday, April 8, 2013 3:48 PM
To: "nanog at nanog.org" <nanog at nanog.org>
Subject: Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN

>In what sense do you mean that? The end-user IPv6 prefix certainly ties
>IPv4 and IPv6 together, hence the interest in the Light-Weight IPv4 over
>IPv6 alternative.
>
>Tom
>
>On 08/04/2013 3:13 PM, Rajiv Asati (rajiva) wrote:
>> Chris,
>>
>> UmmmŠ you mean the IPv6 and IPv4 inter-dependency when you say IP
>> encumbered?
>>
>> If so, the answer is Yes. v6 addressing doesn't need to change to
>> accommodate this IPv4 A+P encoding.
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Rajiv
>>
>...
>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: default.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 87785 bytes
Desc: default.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20130408/3023314c/attachment.jpg>


More information about the NANOG mailing list