Re: ReN: IPv6 tranisition issues

----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Moore" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, December 27, 2002 11:19 PM
Subject: Re: ReN: (ngtrans) IPv6 tranisition issues


> >  Show me the IPv6 killer-app!.
>
> It looks like you're trying to make IPv6 deployment fit into some model
> in your head that requires a single killer app, rather than trying to
> understand why specific interests would want to use IPv6 and whether
> it is economically feasible for those interests to use IPv6
> (possibly tunneled over IPv4).  I don't see a single killer app for
> IPv6; rather I see lots of groups (some larger than others) taking
> advantage of IPv6's improved functionality.   e.g. mobility,
> linear address space (and lack of interference from NATs), ability
> to interoperate with 3G mobile phones, etc.
>
> Since IPv6 is incrementally deployable from the endpoints, it is not
> necessary for IPv6 to have a killer app to drive deployment in order
> for IPv6 to be successful.
>
> Keith
>

The 2 killer applications are going to be:

1. Mobile systems. In IPv6 the right half of an address will be globally
unique to the mobile device and the left half will be unique to the actual
pathway to the device. This will simplify roaming and changing Internet
Service Providers, which is a form of roaming.

2. New Internet Service Providers. The left half of the IPv6 address would
be assigned by the ISP and the right half would come from the MAC-48 or
EUI-64 of the customers hardware. This would also make connection sharing a
LOT simpler.  If a user wants to hide their MAC-48s or EUI-64s from the
public 'net, they can use a made up right half that is manually assigned
using unused Organizationally Unique Identifiers with the u-bit set equal to
zero.

I have found that some NAT boxes, such as the software NATs from Sybergen,
are a lot better than  others. There are also some crummy NAT boxes such as
Wingate, which worked with NONE of my applications. A NAT box is just simply
a retooled router, just that some a better and some are worse.

Likewise, there are SOME IPSEC products than can traverse a NAT  box and
some that cannot. Software quality varies all over the place. That is, you
should ALWAYS test and compare different vendors in order to find which
implementation is best for your system.

Mike Cole, [email protected]