///yes, we are well aware...

///some of the above has been already implemented
in the field in more than 1 mobile operators network. The most painful
thing today is the readiness of customer equipment. It is mostly not available
(besides the 1 well know vendor). When this one is in place, the service
can be provided fairly quick using some of the solutions you have mentioned.
Though, obviously some compromises will have to be made. There are also
some areas in the mobile deployments that are very shallow today, such
as IPv6 in the roaming scenarios.
Roman

From: 
Scott
W Brim

Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 5:01 AM
To: 
Hui
Deng

Cc: 
Ahmed
 Abu-Abed
 ; 
3gv6@ietf.org

Subject: Re: [3gv6] IPv4 depletion just happened
In case you hadn't heard, the GSMS has produced the
first of two white papers  on v4/v6 transition and coexistence, focusing
mainly but not exclusively on  interoperability.  This first
paper is for end-to-end user plane  traffic.  It is now in the
hands of their "interworking and roaming  experts" group,
who will flesh out the details, produce the equivalent of a  handbook,
etc.  The second paper will be on the transport plane and local  breakout.
They will be working on that one through the Spring.
I am concerned about duplication of effort and confusion
of results.   Could you possibly work within GSMA?  They
are the worldwide body that  coordinates operational issues for almost
all mobile operators.  If  independent groups produce conflicting
recommendations, they are the ones who  will have to resolve the conflicts
in any case.
The next face-to-face meeting is in Shanghai, the
same week as the IETF.
Scott
[Sent from my mobile.]
On Feb 1, 2011 9:37 PM, "Hui Deng" <
denghui02@gmail.com
>
wrote:
> please go ahead if any implemention needed and
could  benefit for mobile
> network.
> 
> regards,
> 
>  -Hui
> 
> 2011/2/1 Ahmed Abu-Abed <
ahmed@tamkien.com
>
> 
>>  Hello everyone,
>>
>> IPv4 depletion at the top registry level
 just happened but this mail list
>> has been very  quiet.
>>
>> Is there any interest on this mail list for
 discussing implementing IPv6
>> over existing 3G & upcoming LTE  networks
?
>>
>> -Ahmed
>>
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>> 3gv6 mailing  list
>> 
3gv6@ietf.org
>> 
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/3gv6
>>
>>
_______________________________________________

3gv6 mailing list

3gv6@ietf.org

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/3gv6
=A0
///yes, we are well aware... 
=A0 <=
br>Practically, the implications are more neste=
d NATing, =A0which may break a few things, or getting out of public IPv4 co=
mpletely and =A0assigning only public IPv6 addresses to subscribers via NAT=
64/DNS64, or some =A0form of DS-Lite v4-in-v6 tunneling. Will=A0any of=A0th=
ese=A0schemes be =A0ready for field=A0implementation=A0operators by Q3 2011=
 ? 

///some of the above has been already i=
mplemented in the field in more than 1 mobile operators network. The most p=
ainful thing today is the readiness of customer equipment. It is mostly not=
 available (besides the 1 well know vendor). When this one is in place, the=
 service can be provided fairly quick using some of the solutions you have =
mentioned. Though, obviously some compromises will have to be made. There a=
re also some areas in the mobile deployments that are very shallow today, s=
uch as IPv6 in the roaming scenarios. 

Roman 
=A0 

From:
 Scott W=
 Brim 

Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 5:01 AM 
To: Hui Deng<=
span lang=3D"EN-US"> 

Cc: Ahmed =A0Abu-Abed ; 3gv6@i=
etf.org 

Subject: Re: [3gv6] IPv4 depletion just happened 

In case you hadn't heard, the GSMS has produced the first of two whit=
e papers =A0on v4/v6 transition and coexistence, focusing mainly but not ex=
clusively on =A0interoperability.=A0 This first paper is for end-to-end use=
r plane =A0traffic.=A0 It is now in the hands of their "interworking a=
nd roaming =A0experts" group, who will flesh out the details, produce =
the equivalent of a =A0handbook, etc.=A0 The second paper will be on the tr=
ansport plane and local =A0breakout. They will be working on that one throu=
gh the Spring. <=
br>

I am concerned about duplication of eff=
ort and confusion of results.=A0 =A0Could you possibly work within GSMA?=A0=
 They are the worldwide body that =A0coordinates operational issues for alm=
ost all mobile operators.=A0 If =A0independent groups produce conflicting r=
ecommendations, they are the ones who =A0will have to resolve the conflicts=
 in any case. 

The next face-to-face meeting is in Sha=
nghai, the same week as the IETF. 

Scott=

[Sent from my mobile.] 
On Feb 1, 2011 9:37 PM, "Hui Deng" <denghui02@gmail.com<=
/span>> wrote: 

> please go ahead if any implemention ne=
eded and could =A0benefit for mobile 
> network. 

> 
> regards, 
> 

> =A0-Hui 
> 
> 2011/2/1 Ahmed Abu-Abed <ahmed@tamkien.com> 

> 
>> =A0Hello =
everyone, 
>> 

>> IPv4 depletion at the top registry=
 level =A0just happened but this mail list 
>> has=
 been very =A0quiet. 

>> 
>> Is th=
ere any interest on this mail list for =A0discussing implementing IPv6 

>> over existing 3G & upcoming LT=
E =A0networks ? =

>> 

>> -Ahmed 
>>=
; 
>> 

>> =A0_______________________________=
________________=

>> 3gv6 mailing =A0list 

>> 3gv6@ietf.org 
>> https://www.ietf.org=
/mailman/listinfo/3gv6 

>> 
>> 
_______________________________________________<=
span style=3D"FONT-FAMILY: 'Courier New'" lang=3D"EN-US">

3gv6 mailing list
3gv6@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mai=
lman/listinfo/3gv6 

--001636c598db36e37d049b4b7e1a--