Hi @peanball, Thanks for putting this together.

I know there is a lot here, and a lot in App Runtime Platform's domain. My main thoughts are:

• This is going to touch a lot of things. I sure we will learn about more things as we go.
• I agree with your comment that this should be backwards compatible. All of the defaults for all new properties should default to the "old way".
• I think windows should be in scope, unless there is a good reason not to include it. We maintain two OSes we should support both.

@ameowlia, thanks for the feedback.

Regarding windows: we will need support here in describing what needs to be touched as we (the current authors of this RFC) are not using Windows as target.

Hi @peanball ,
to adopt IPv6 in cf-deployment and other projects, we will need an update of bosh-bootloader. The tool must be able to configure AAAA records for the load balancer ingress addresses. Not sure what changes are needed for the outgoing traffic. The cloud-configs must be updated with the new CIDRs. There are certainly more changes necessary, is anyone already working on that?

For cf-deployment, we will have to update our test bbl environments when bosh-bootloader is ready. The "staging" and "running" security groups must be updated, but that should be moderate effort. There will be certainly more changes necessary...

Best Regards,

Jochen.

Jochen wrote:

to adopt IPv6 in cf-deployment and other projects, we will need an update of bosh-bootloader. The tool must be able to configure AAAA records for the load balancer ingress addresses. Not sure what changes are needed for the outgoing traffic. The cloud-configs must be updated with the new CIDRs. There are certainly more changes necessary, is anyone already working on that?

@fmoehler, could you support me in extend on that?

Regarding windows: we will need support here in describing what needs to be touched as we (the current authors of this RFC) are not using Windows as target.

I've reached out to @ebroberson, our resident Windows expert, to comment more about what changes will be needed for windows.

For cf-deployment I think it makes sense to define an (experimental) ops-file for enabling IPv6 early so that the different components have an integration point for their settings.

Probably it makes sense to add a validation pipeline for IPv6 as soon as bbl and bosh supports it. Similar to the noble validation pipeline.

Windows enables IPv6 by default as of Windows Server 2008, so I don't think we'll need anything specific there.

Windows enables IPv6 by default as of Windows Server 2008, so I don't think we'll need anything specific there.

@ebroberson what about the following parts:
https://github.com/sap-contributions/cf-community/blob/639791ad22e3d82ac3f861ad4a9741bde0295ce9/toc/rfc/rfc-draft-ipv6-dual-stack-for-cf.md?plain=1#L101-L103 and https://github.com/sap-contributions/cf-community/blob/rfc-ipv6-in-cf/toc/rfc/rfc-draft-ipv6-dual-stack-for-cf.md?plain=1#L55?

@beyhan I was referring to anything else that might be Windows-specific on the stemcells / vms. Windows itself already supports dual-stack with IPv6, so I don't believe we'll need anything further other than what the RFC already specifies.

@stephanme, @rkoster, @ameowlia, @ebroberson, @jochenehret, @mariash, @beyhan, I have addressed the feedback provided so far. Thank you for your feedback!

We might need to write a bit more about the bosh-bootstrap / bbl environments. Help here would be appreciated, as I've not worked with bbl environments or bosh-bootstrap yet.

We discussed this RFC during the TOC meeting on 11th of March and decided to start the FCP with the goal to accept the RFC.