RES: IPv6 tranisition issues

  Hi folks,

  My question is: for 3GPP is really MANDATORY to use IPv6 in hansets? Can hansets use IPv4?
Thanks,

   Marcelo.

-----Mensagem original-----
De: Thakur, Anand [mailto:[email protected]]
Enviada em: quinta-feira, 26 de dezembro de 2002 07:33
Para: [email protected]; [email protected]
Assunto: RE: (ngtrans) IPv6 tranisition issues


Hi Nick,

2^32 addresses may be a lot of addresses for now. but just try and foresee
the situation that will exist 7-10 years from now when every mobile phone
and for that matter every mobile device will be connected to the internet.
do you think it will be feasible for the mobile operator/ISP to 'NAT' the
millions of nodes that it serves? 
Especially since 3GPP has mandated IPV6 for IMS, operators have no choice
but to go for IPV6.
as far as the cost factor is concerned, ipv6 implementation is not at all
expensive. though transition issues between v4 and v6 may be a bit expensive
to handle.
windows xp,2000,Linux to name some of the more popular OSs are (or can
easily be) IPV6 enabled. As far as applications are concerned you need
simple application proxies (that almost any socket programmer can design) to
make your ipv4 applications talk to their ipv6 counterparts. you can even
use BIS or BIA.
One very important factor is that when mobile IP comes into the picture
(believe me one day mobile ip will prevail over and above layer 2 mobility)
mobile ipv4 is not nearly as good,secure and hastle free as mobile ipv6.

convinced?

regards
Anand Thakur
HCL Perot Systems (A SEI CMM Level 5 Company)
Plot No 3, Sector 125, NOIDA (UP)-201301, India
* Tel  +91 120 4432755-79, X3348 (EPABX)
mobile:9811748512

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	[email protected] [SMTP:[email protected]]
> Sent:	Thursday, December 26, 2002 2:34 PM
> To:	[email protected]
> Subject:	(ngtrans) IPv6 tranisition issues
> 
> This may be slightly OTT for this mailing-list. I am looking for good
> paper/presentations from oponents of IPv6 transition (and perhaps the
> IPv6 answers to these). We are planning to write a paper to form an IPv6
> steering committee here in Malaysia and need to be prepared.
> 
> Any help would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> Some of the points I have noted and gathered:
> 
> +Network built on NAT is fine and there is no real need to look at IPv6.
> +What is so special about IPv6 that I cannot patch and do with IPv4.
> +Cannot see the immediate 'cost versus benefit' of implementing IPv6.
> +Limited number of applications/hardware that are IPv6 enabled.
> +Lack of educational material from service providers, equipment vendors,  
> and R&E institutions.
> +Poor government/regulatory support and awareness.
> +IPv6 is about 90% complete work still needed on PPP, DNS standards,
> multicast/anycast, etc.
> +Network renumbering, service disruption and other operational issues.
> +Initial 'land-rush' for IPv4 address space has resulted in a slightly
> complacent outlook by US hardware/software developers.
> +No 'Y2K flag-day' for IPv4 address exhaustion. Come on, are we really
> running out of IPv4 addresses? 2^32 is quite a lot of addresses.
> 
> Best regards,
> -nick/
>