IPv6 deployment excuses

Mon Jul 4 21:50:19 UTC 2016

On 2016-07-04 20:50, Ca By wrote:

Always so funny how people love talking how great MAP scales, yet it has
never been deployed at scale. 464XLAT and ds-lite have been deployed at
real scale, so has 6RD.

MAP is like beta max. Technically great, but reality is poor.

The two MAP RFCs are dated July 2015 just one year old. The world does not
move that fast and especially not "large deployments".

6RD is dated August 2010
DS-LITE is dated August 2011
464XLAT is dated April 2013

Someone from Comcast just said at the recent RIPE conference in Copenhagen
that they are considering MAP. Now Comcast were also one the larger 6RD
deployments. Why the switch? Because those technologies do not solve the
same problem.

6RD is a short term technology fix to get some IPv6 out to the customers
quickly in a network that is otherwise pure IPv4.

MAP is a long term solution to deliver some IPv4 in a world where IPv4 is
deprecated and IPv6 is the main protocol. It is meant to deployed in a
network that is otherwise pure IPv6, the exact opposite to 6RD.

The two other technologies mentioned do the same as MAP more or less, but
both requires carrier NAT, which is expensive for the ISP and has a lack of
control as seen from the end user point of view (no port forwarding etc).

I for one is going to continue to demand that my vendors implement MAP, so
I do not have to pay for a carrier NAT solution that always is going to be
in need of upgrade, will be under DDoS attack every tuesday and just
plainly is not a necessary element in the network. MAP on the other hand is
stateless and it is very simple to tack on an encapsulating header. Any
router that can do GRE should also be able to do MAP.

Regards,

Baldur