The important message on Tore's post IS ALL ABOUT "Sony and Playstation are doing IPv6 in the wrong way!".
Em seg., 5 de abr. de 2021 às 19:16, Douglas Fischer < fischerdoug...@gmail.com> escreveu: > Jordi, If I sum the numbers of times "It is a deployment with 25.000.000 > customers, using GPON, DSL and cellular." (or similar)(EN, ES, PT) appears > on my mail box, I guess will be over 2 hundred... > > But every time it hits on: > -> Support Tickets! What do they tell us? > -> Field Support and L1 Support Guys. Do they agree with that? > > Let me be clear: > - I like IPv6! > - I encourage the use of IPv6! > - I think those guys that say "IPv6 won't be adopted" a bunch of lunatics! > > But, more important than IPv4, IPv6, "IPv12" is that my customers become > happy and D'ONT BOTHER ME. > If I would use IPX/SPX and get them even happier than they are today, I > would do! > > The important message on Tore's post IS NOT "464XLAT is better then Dual > Stack". > The important message on Tore's post IS NOT "Sony and Playstation are > doing IPv6 in the wrong way!". > > Could you please help every ISP, Every Gamer, demanding Sony and > Playstation to do IPv6 the right way, without wanting to "seize the > occasion" to publicize the IPv6 transition case and consultancy service? > <CuteCatAskLooking> Please? </CuteCatAskLooking> > > > > Em seg., 5 de abr. de 2021 às 17:02, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG < > nanog@nanog.org> escreveu: > >> Hi Douglas, >> >> >> >> In a different mailing list, we had a discussion with Tore about his >> testing and other testing that may not be available in that blog. It was >> basically about 464XLAT. >> >> >> >> As you know IPv6-only with IPv4aaS, provides **dual-stack** in the >> customer LANs, where the PS5 was sitting. >> >> >> >> So, we concluded in that discussion that there is **no difference** for >> the PS5 being used with 464XLAT vs “regular dual-stack”, as expected. >> >> >> >> Further to that, I’ve done a very complete testing, for a customer, with >> a PS4 in a LAN with 464XLAT and everything worked fine. Unfortunately, as >> this was contracted by a customer, I can’t disclose all the test set, but >> believe me it worked. It is a deployment with 25.000.000 customers, using >> GPON, DSL and cellular. >> >> >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Jordi >> >> @jordipalet >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> El 5/4/21 21:32, "NANOG en nombre de Douglas Fischer" < >> nanog-bounces+jordi.palet=consulintel...@nanog.org en nombre de >> fischerdoug...@gmail.com> escribió: >> >> >> >> Here goes a link fo an excellent analysis of IPv6 and Playstation >> >> This says a lot about why some prefer DualStack. >> >> >> https://toreanderson.github.io/2021/02/23/ipv6-support-in-the-playstation-5.html >> >> >> >> Em ter., 2 de mar. de 2021 às 07:59, Douglas Fischer < >> fischerdoug...@gmail.com> escreveu: >> >> Hello Mark... >> >> Yes, until when I was decided to Fight Agins IPv4, I tried the Fixes. >> >> But after some time, I saw that very little of the problems were due to >> inadequacies of the ISP's responsibility equipment. >> >> >> Most of the difficulties stemmed from: >> A) Choices of end-users in their networks. >> (Something that the ISP may even try to influence, but that ends up >> bringing more "childrens" to the support queue, as customers said, "Your >> company that recommended me to use software X instead of Y, so you have to >> teach me how to use software X".) >> B) Lack of adequate support for IPv6 by the companies that provided the >> service on the internet (eGames, IPTV, SIP-VOIP). >> >> After some time beating the dead horse, and mainly seeing that these >> problems did not happen with Dual-Stack, I decided to do what I was able to >> do well. >> >> Since 1-2 years ago, things have improved a lot in these two points, >> pointed out as problems that do not concern the ISP. >> Perhaps it is time to review this approach. >> >> >> >> >> >> Em qua., 24 de fev. de 2021 às 18:35, Mark Andrews <ma...@isc.org> >> escreveu: >> >> Well then use one of the encapsulating IPv4AAS mechanisms rather than >> 464XLAT (DS-Lite, MAP-E). They don’t involve translating the payload >> between IPv4 and IPv6. That said what you are reporting below are >> implementation bugs. Did you report them to the vendor? Did you install >> the fix? Rewriting is required as you may have native IPv6 clients rather >> than clients behind a CLAT on the customer side. >> >> > On 25 Feb 2021, at 01:48, Douglas Fischer <fischerdoug...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > Is this pain you have lived or verified with first hand testing? >> > >> > Yep! A lot! >> > >> > LOL gamers can be pretty much insistent... >> > (haha.jpg + haha-crying.jpg) >> > >> > And Specifically on SIP/Voip over the Internet, with deep analysis at >> all the parts involved. >> > The most common issue is incoming Calls to SIP endpoints behind 464Xlat >> using IPv4 with unidirectional audio. >> > And several types of causes: >> > - CPEs receives the RTP-Stream but doesn't Re-Map it correctly to the >> IPv4 inside end-point >> > - Jool receives the RTP-Stream but ignores it and don't map it to the >> "fake" v6 address >> > - Some APPs do (by some crazy reason) the re-write of Session Layer >> header to v6 address, and Sip-Proxys ignores it... >> > >> > After hours and hours fighting against the lions, we decided: >> > "Let's keep those clients in Dual-Stak and CGNAT" and it just worked. >> > >> > And after that, the obvious conclusions: >> > - Why will us keep that much options of endpoints connections, if only >> one solves all the problems? >> > - We will need to train the guys on the Dual-Stack/CGNAT Scnario, and >> 464Xlat Scenario... Knowing about Danos, about Jool... >> > - It doesn't scale! >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Douglas Fernando Fischer >> > Engº de Controle e Automação >> >> -- >> Mark Andrews, ISC >> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia >> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Douglas Fernando Fischer >> Engº de Controle e Automação >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Douglas Fernando Fischer >> Engº de Controle e Automação >> >> ********************************************** >> IPv4 is over >> Are you ready for the new Internet ? >> http://www.theipv6company.com >> The IPv6 Company >> >> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or >> confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of >> the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized >> disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this >> information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly >> prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the >> intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or >> use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including >> attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal >> offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this >> communication and delete it. >> >> > > -- > Douglas Fernando Fischer > Engº de Controle e Automação > -- Douglas Fernando Fischer Engº de Controle e Automação
