Hi, On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 01:41:56PM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: > You are handing out the normal 192.168/16 space on the LAN side. You > pass them on to the gateway without any NAT. I.e. default IPv4 route to > 192.0.0.1 (and your device is 192.0.0.2). The AFTR can identify the > interface by the public IPv6 address and the IPv4 address range only > needs to be unique wrt RFC1918 behind the CPE. Its something like the introduction of 6rd - You can do this in a very uniform environment e.g. ISP provided CPE, ISP managed CPE etc. This is not the case for todays ISPs in Germany where its basically "bring your own device" in certain ways. > > As far as i understood the reasons for DS Light is licensing costs > > in the mobile backhaul as those are per PDN context e.g. backhaul channel > > to the mobile. Those are today not capable to do dual stack (Although > > Standardised in 3GPP Version 8/9) so you'd need 2 PDN contexts, one for > > IPv4 and one for IPv6. So Mobile Operators thought of DS Light so > > they'll not need another context and simply switch UAs to v6 transport > > only. > > That's a different problem of how to provide IPv4 connectivity to mobile > devices which only support one single context that's either v4 or v6. Its not a matter of supporting more than one context - most current UAs can support more than one context - The Apple Universe was one of the first to actually require more than one context IIRC. This made the iPhone a more expensive Mobile on the Network Side. A mobile which supports v6 today is one that is capable of more than one context. Flo -- Florian Lohoff f@zz.de
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature