Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: IPv6 and HTTPS
From: Don Gould <don () bowenvale co nz>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 19:29:28 +1200

Hi Jay,

The DTC hosting control panel team had a chat about this issue earlier in the year.

http://gplhost.sg/lists/dtcdev/msg03482.html - Interesting reading.

I followed a little, but decided that SNI just isn't worth our time.

In my personal view, an hour spent on SNI is an hour wasted that I should be spending on IPv6.

There's still more than enough IPv4 space about, it's just going to get more and more expensive.


I'm happy to put IP space costs on my customers to help fund my IPv6 progress where I can.

I agree with others that there is still way to much XP and other non supporting platforms and I suspect that by the time we get those out of the system we'll be most of the way there for IPv6 access.

I feel a bit like it's a case of "am I committed to IPv6 or not?".


On 26/04/2013 1:24 p.m., Jay Ashworth wrote:
Ok, here's a stupid question[1], which I'd know the answer to if I ran bigger

Does anyone know how much IPv4 space is allocated *specifically* to cater
to the fact that HTTPS requires a dedicated IP per DNS name?

Is that a statistically significant percentage of all the IPs in use?

Wasn't there something going on to make HTTPS IP muxable?  How's that coming?

How fast could it be deployed?

-- jra

[1] Ok, five questions.

Don Gould
31 Acheson Ave
Christchurch, New Zealand
Ph: + 64 3 348 7235
Mobile: + 64 21 114 0699

  By Date           By Thread  

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