Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 17:15:00 -0800


On Nov 26, 2012, at 15:10 , "Dobbins, Roland" <rdobbins () arbor net> wrote:


On Nov 27, 2012, at 3:37 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:

CGN does not scale and cannot scale. At best, it's a hack that might allow us to cope with a few years of transition 
while there are still devices in homes that are IPv4-only, but it certainly doesn't reduce or remove the imperative.

I agree wholeheartedly, but I'm unsure whether or not this view is held by those who control spending and 
prioritization within most, or even many, ISPs.

Mobility (and everything is inexorably becoming mobile) is an obvious place where IPv6 makes a lot of sense, for 
example.  But native IPv6 on one's own access networks and then gatewaying/proxying to IPv4 for actual 'Internet' 
connectivity seems to be a significant direction.

Interesting. All the IPv6 capable carriers I talk to are only gatewaying/proxying to IPv4 for things unreachable via 
IPv6.

If you've got an IPv6 capable cell phone on an IPv6 capable mobile network, I doubt that you get to google through an 
IPv4 proxy.

Owen



  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]