Talk:IPv6 transition mechanism

Change of title

I renamed the title phrase "IPv6 translation" to "IPv6 transition", because the goal is a transition to IPv6, not the reverse (from IPv6). This is the standard term used when referring in general to the migration to IPv6. The first citations of the article describe transition mechanisms, not translation mechanism, but the remainder does list the aspects of "translation" of features. Alternatively, to be correct, the title might also be "IPv4-IPv6 translation mechanism", if one want to stick with the 'translation' term. Discussions are encouraged. Kbrose (talk) 22:19, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

This sounds reasonable to me. I went ahead and fixed the double redirects. Wrs1864 (talk) 23:13, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

thanks for the opinion and the fixes Kbrose (talk) 00:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable to me too. Translation is one of several a transition mechanisms. --Kvng (talk) 21:21, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Regroup

I think that we should regroup all the IPv6 transition mechanisms in three main groups:

- Dual Stack

- Tunneling

- Translation

This is the usual form of division of the types of mechanisms in serveral documentation, including IPV6#Transition mechanisms. If we think so, I can do it.Mtorrecilla (talk) 15:16, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Comcast Discussion

No reference to Comcast's adoption of DS-Lite, or the fact that they have published a custom open source router firmware based on OpenWRT? Their firmware is designed to use 6RD to tunnel IPv6 over IPv4 at first and then automatically detect and reverse the tunneling when Comcast provisions the user with IPv6. IMHO they kind of bungled their management of the firmware release: they just put it out there, and expected "the community" to go wild. Doesn't mean it's any less impressive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EasternPA (talk • contribs) 00:00, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Market relevance?

This article is supposed to be about IPv6 transition methods. It appears an irrelevant section about IPv4 markets is here. It appears to violate NPoV, and is the only section which doesn't actuall have anything to do with moving IPv6 packets. I think it should be removed. jzp (talk) 06:48, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

I agree with your assessment and removed the section. Kbrose (talk) 16:31, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

"See above?" but no mention of above?

The statement "The client uses a SIIT translator (see above)" in the section about 464XLAT makes no sense, as there is no "above" explanation as to what a SIIT translator is. I would fix but I have no idea what a SIIT translator is :P. 184.170.93.22 (talk) 03:30, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on IPv6 transition mechanism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070901003217/http://www.join.uni-muenster.de/Dokumente/Howtos/Howto_TRT.php?lang=en to http://www.join.uni-muenster.de/Dokumente/Howtos/Howto_TRT.php?lang=en
• Added archive https://archive.is/20130415041216/http://tr.ietejournals.org/text.asp?2012/29/2/114/95384 to http://tr.ietejournals.org/text.asp?2012%2F29%2F2%2F114%2F95384
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130531072000/http://www.itiis.org/tiis/download.jsp?filename=TIIS_Vol5No7P2July2011.pdf to http://www.itiis.org/tiis/download.jsp?filename=TIIS_Vol5No7P2July2011.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:07, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Question.

What about apns prior to Android lollipops that show dual IPs? Will it work? Daren50 (talk) 19:20, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

MAP-T and MAP-E already in extensive production use

While not adopted formally by IETF yet, both MAP-T and MAP-E are already in production use by some ISPs, for example Iliad and Sky Italia in Europe https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/open-house/presentations/richard-patterson-sky-italia-and-map-t https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_deployment