Pros and Cons of IPv6 Transition Technologies for IPv4aaS
draft-lmhp-v6ops-transition-comparison-06

Document Type Replaced Internet-Draft (v6ops WG)
Authors Gábor Lencse  , Jordi Palet Martinez  , Lee Howard  , Richard Patterson  , Ian Farrer 
Last updated 2021-04-06 (latest revision 2021-01-09)
Replaced by draft-ietf-v6ops-transition-comparison
Stream Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats
Expired & archived
pdf htmlized (tools) htmlized bibtex
Stream WG state Candidate for WG Adoption
Document shepherd No shepherd assigned
IESG IESG state Replaced by draft-ietf-v6ops-transition-comparison
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)

This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft can be found at
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-lmhp-v6ops-transition-comparison-06.txt

Abstract

Several IPv6 transition technologies have been developed to provide customers with IPv4-as-a-Service (IPv4aaS) for ISPs with an IPv6-only access and/or core network. All these technologies have their advantages and disadvantages, and depending on existing topology, skills, strategy and other preferences, one of these technologies may be the most appropriate solution for a network operator. This document examines the five most prominent IPv4aaS technologies considering a number of different aspects to provide network operators with an easy to use reference to assist in selecting the technology that best suits their needs.

Authors

Gábor Lencse (lencse@hit.bme.hu)
Jordi Palet Martinez (jordi.palet@theipv6company.com)
Lee Howard (lee@asgard.org)
Richard Patterson (richard.patterson@sky.uk)
Ian Farrer (ian.farrer@telekom.de)

(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)