<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 10/23/21 11:52 AM, Ca By wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAD6AjGTmeMGtgyvPJddoHQUE36xNwZOFOy8TfEf8w4HwB9D-Ww@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Oct 23, 2021 at
10:33 AM Michael Thomas <<a href="mailto:mike@mtcc.com"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">mike@mtcc.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)">
<div>
<p>So I'm curious how the mobile operators deploying ipv6
to the handsets are dealing with ipv4. The simplest
would be to get the phone a routable ipv4 address, but
that would seemingly exacerbate the reason they went to
v6 in the first place. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div dir="auto">First, consider that the 3 major cell
carriers in the usa each have 100 million customers. Also,
consider they all now have a home broadband angle. Where do
100 million ipv4 addresses come from? Not rfc 1918, not
arin, … and we are just talking about customer ip addresses,
not considering towers, backend systems, call centers,
retail …. </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">So the genesis of 464xlat / rfc 6877 is that
ipv4 cannot go where we need to go, the mobile architecture
must be ipv6 to be comply with the e2e principle and not
constrain the scaling of the customers / edge. Other cell
carriers believe in operating many unique ipv4 networks …
like a <a href="http://10.0.0.0/8" moz-do-not-send="true">10.0.0.0/8</a>
per metro, but even that breaks down and cannot scale… and
you end up with proxies / nats / sbcs everywhere just to
make internal apps like ims work, which is a lot of state. <br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>464, that's what i was looking for... there are so many
transition schemes i wasn't sure which one they chose. So it's
essentially double NAT'ing. Does that require TURN too for
streaming? I can't remember what the limitations of STUN are. <br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAD6AjGTmeMGtgyvPJddoHQUE36xNwZOFOy8TfEf8w4HwB9D-Ww@mail.gmail.com">
<div>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)">
<div>
<p dir="auto">Are carriers NAT'ing somewhere along the
line? If so, where? Like does the phone encapsulate v4
in 4-in-6? Or does the phone get a net 10 address and it
gets NAT'd by the carrier? </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">~80% of traffic goes to fb, goog, yt, netflix,
bing, o364, hbomax, apple tv, … all of which are ipv6. So,
only 20% of traffic requires nat, when you have ipv6. I am
hoping tiktoc and aws move to be default on for ipv6 soon. <br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Yeah, aws is the most glaring since it probably hosts a
significant portion of the long tail. it appears that aws only
supports v6 with vpn's. Google only appears to support v6 if you
use their load balancer. Sad.<br>
</p>
Mike<br>
</body>
</html>