draft-ietf-softwire-stateless-4v6-motivation-02.txt   draft-ietf-softwire-stateless-4v6-motivation-03.txt 
Softwires Working Group M. Boucadair, Ed. Softwires Working Group M. Boucadair, Ed.
Internet-Draft France Telecom Internet-Draft France Telecom
Intended status: Informational S. Matsushima Intended status: Informational S. Matsushima
Expires: December 14, 2012 Softbank Telecom Expires: December 17, 2012 Softbank Telecom
Y. Lee Y. Lee
Comcast Comcast
O. Bonness O. Bonness
Deutsche Telekom Deutsche Telekom
I. Borges I. Borges
Portugal Telecom Portugal Telecom
G. Chen G. Chen
China Mobile China Mobile
June 12, 2012 June 15, 2012
Motivations for Carrier-side Stateless IPv4 over IPv6 Migration Motivations for Carrier-side Stateless IPv4 over IPv6 Migration
Solutions Solutions
draft-ietf-softwire-stateless-4v6-motivation-02 draft-ietf-softwire-stateless-4v6-motivation-03
Abstract Abstract
IPv4 service continuity is one of the most pressing problems that IPv4 service continuity is one of the most pressing problems that
must be resolved by Service Providers during the IPv6 transition must be resolved by Service Providers during the IPv6 transition
period - especially after the exhaustion of the public IPv4 address period - especially after the exhaustion of the public IPv4 address
space. Current standardization effort that addresses IPv4 service space. Current standardization effort that addresses IPv4 service
continuity focuses on stateful mechanisms. This document elaborates continuity focuses on stateful mechanisms. This document elaborates
on the motivations for the need to undertake a companion effort to on the motivations for the need to undertake a companion effort to
specify stateless IPv4 over IPv6 approaches. specify stateless IPv4 over IPv6 approaches.
skipping to change at page 1, line 46 skipping to change at page 1, line 46
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 14, 2012. This Internet-Draft will expire on December 17, 2012.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
skipping to change at page 3, line 37 skipping to change at page 3, line 37
recommendations and guidelines, is available at [EURESCOM]). recommendations and guidelines, is available at [EURESCOM]).
Current standardization effort that is meant to address this IPv4 Current standardization effort that is meant to address this IPv4
service continuity issue focuses mainly on stateful mechanisms that service continuity issue focuses mainly on stateful mechanisms that
sharing of global IPv4 addresses between Customers is based upon the sharing of global IPv4 addresses between Customers is based upon the
deployment of NAT (Network Address Translation) capabilities in the deployment of NAT (Network Address Translation) capabilities in the
network. Because of some caveats of such stateful approaches the network. Because of some caveats of such stateful approaches the
Service Provider community feels that a companion effort is required Service Provider community feels that a companion effort is required
to specify stateless IPv4 over IPv6 approaches. Note that the to specify stateless IPv4 over IPv6 approaches. Note that the
stateless solution elaborated in this document focuses on the stateless solution elaborated in this document focuses on the
carrier-side stateless IPv4 over IPv6 solution. States may still carrier-side stateless IPv4 over IPv6 solution. In the context of
exist in other equipments such as customer premises equipment. address sharing, states should be maintained in other equipments,
e.g. customer premises equipment or host.
This document provides elaboration on the need for carrier-side This document provides elaboration on the need for carrier-side
stateless IPv4 over IPv6 solution. stateless IPv4 over IPv6 solution.
More discussions about stateless vs. stateful can be found at More discussions about stateless vs. stateful can be found at
[RFC6144]. [RFC6144].
2. Terminology 2. Terminology
This document makes use of the following terms: This document makes use of the following terms:
skipping to change at page 14, line 8 skipping to change at page 14, line 8
[EURESCOM] [EURESCOM]
Levis, P., Borges, I., Bonness, O. and L. Dillon L., "IPv4 Levis, P., Borges, I., Bonness, O. and L. Dillon L., "IPv4
address exhaustion: Issues and Solutions for Service address exhaustion: Issues and Solutions for Service
Providers", March 2010, <http://archive.eurescom.eu/~pub/ Providers", March 2010, <http://archive.eurescom.eu/~pub/
deliverables/documents/P1900-series/P1952/D2bis/ deliverables/documents/P1900-series/P1952/D2bis/
P1952-D2bis.pdf>. P1952-D2bis.pdf>.
[I-D.ietf-behave-lsn-requirements] [I-D.ietf-behave-lsn-requirements]
Perreault, S., Yamagata, I., Miyakawa, S., Nakagawa, A., Perreault, S., Yamagata, I., Miyakawa, S., Nakagawa, A.,
and H. Ashida, "Common requirements for Carrier Grade NATs and H. Ashida, "Common requirements for Carrier Grade NATs
(CGNs)", draft-ietf-behave-lsn-requirements-06 (work in (CGNs)", draft-ietf-behave-lsn-requirements-07 (work in
progress), May 2012. progress), June 2012.
[I-D.ietf-intarea-nat-reveal-analysis] [I-D.ietf-intarea-nat-reveal-analysis]
Boucadair, M., Touch, J., Levis, P., and R. Penno, Boucadair, M., Touch, J., Levis, P., and R. Penno,
"Analysis of Solution Candidates to Reveal a Host "Analysis of Solution Candidates to Reveal a Host
Identifier (HOST_ID) in Shared Address Deployments", Identifier (HOST_ID) in Shared Address Deployments",
draft-ietf-intarea-nat-reveal-analysis-02 (work in draft-ietf-intarea-nat-reveal-analysis-02 (work in
progress), April 2012. progress), April 2012.
[I-D.matsushima-v6ops-transition-experience] [I-D.matsushima-v6ops-transition-experience]
Matsushima, S., Yamazaki, Y., Sun, C., Yamanishi, M., and Matsushima, S., Yamazaki, Y., Sun, C., Yamanishi, M., and
 End of changes. 6 change blocks. 
8 lines changed or deleted 9 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/