Re: IPv6 woes - RFC

[JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>]

You're confusing things.

The fact that cellular providers, actually cellular equipment vendors, do not implement DHCPv6-PD, doesn't mean that 
you can't use DHCPv6-PD for assigning IPv6 prefixes using 464XLAT in broadband.

See RFC8585 and RFC8683.
 

El 6/9/21 14:56, "NANOG en nombre de Bjørn Mork" <nanog-bounces+jordi.palet=consulintel.es () nanog org en nombre de 
bjorn () mork no> escribió:

    JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG <nanog () nanog org> writes:

    > All this is resolved using IPv6-only and IPv4aaS, the same way as
    > cellular providers are doing with 464XLAT.

    Sure, there are a gazillion ways to provde edge access to both IPv4 and
    IPv6.  You can pick anyone you like.  But the extra layers still do not
    come for free.

    And cellular providers give you a single /64.  Not even useful as IPv6
    access for anything larger than a single handset.  Extending that /64 to
    something you can use is non-trivial.  How many providers have actually
    done that?

    And how many end users cared?




    Bjørn



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be 
for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, 
distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly 
prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any 
disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached 
files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to 
inform about this communication and delete it.