[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1393293719.6823.148.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 02:01:59 +0000
From: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: dcbw@...hat.com, mcgrof@...not-panic.com, zoltan.kiss@...rix.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kuznet@....inr.ac.ru, jmorris@...ei.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org,
kaber@...sh.net
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 2/4] net: enables interface option to skip IP
On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 19:12 -0500, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
> Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 00:02:00 +0000
>
> > You can run an internal network, or access network, as v6-only with
> > NAT64 and DNS64 at the border. I believe some mobile networks are doing
> > this; it was also done on the main FOSDEM wireless network this year.
>
> This seems to be bloating up the networking headers of the internal
> network, for what purpose?
>
> For mobile that's doubly inadvisable.
I don't know what the reasoning is for the mobile network operators.
They're forced to do NAT for v4 somewhere, and maybe v6-only makes the
access network easier to manage.
I doubt the extra header length hurts that much on a 3G or 4G network.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.
- Albert Einstein
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (812 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists