Settling IPv4-IPv6 connectivity disputes when only one of the protocols is supported

Original Language Español Date Published 06/01/2016 Last Modified 06/01/2016
Last Call for Comments Period Does not apply Date Ratified Does not apply Implementation Date Does not apply
Status Abandoned Download TXT PDF XML DOCX
See other versions 1.0 2.0 (compare)

Authors

Name: Juan José Gaytán Hernández Magro
Email: jgaytanh@alestra.com.mx
Organization: Alestra, S. de R.L. de C.V.

General opinion

Proposal Data

Policy Type: LACNIC
Id: LAC-2016-1
Last version: 2
Presentations:

Summary

Defining a settlement rule for cases of IPv4-IPv6 connectivity. When the user of a network (a carrier) only supports IPv4 and wants to communicate with a user of another network (another carrier) that supports only IPv6, which results in a dispute, the user that supports only IPv4 must be required to update their infrastructure to support dual stack.

Rationale

It is important to establish rules to prevent NAT64 solutions as far as possible. Otherwise, such measures will only delay the adoption of IPv6 – the protocol that is to prevail in the future. There are likely to be many cases in the not too distant future of disputes over who should make changes in their infrastructure: the user/carrier supporting only IPv4 or the one supporting only IPv6. The use of NAT64 is not sustainable in the long term.

Text

It is proposed that a rule should be established to settle disputes relating to connectivity problems between a user supporting only IPv4 and another supporting only IPv6. The user/carrier supporting only IPv4 must be required to upgrade to IPv6; or else the adoption of IPv6 will be delayed.

Additional Information

None

Timetable

On a case-by-case basis

References

None

Privacy Policy