Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: IPv6 and HTTPS
From: Jakob Heitz <jakob.heitz () ericsson com>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 06:45:25 +0000

That's evil.

Charge what it costs to provide each service.
If and when it costs more to provide IPv4 service (and only then), then charge more for it.

I imagine in a few years the tradeoff: IPv6 has less connectivity (IPv4 clients can't reach you), but IPv4 is more 
expensive (pay for the address). Then the tide might turn.


Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 17:34:48 -0500
From: Jimmy Hess <mysidia () gmail com>
To: Randy Bush <randy () psg com>
Cc: North American Network Operators Group <nanog () nanog org>
Subject: Re: IPv6 and HTTPS
Message-ID:
   <CAAAwwbWyrT4dbqoXwQ-QKhGou15voeNBtr8qBbkLchX90t87Lg () mail gmail com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On 4/28/13, Randy Bush <randy () psg com> wrote:
Doing away with IPv4 isn't a sane short-term goal for anyone
who wants global internet connectivity/reachability, period.

Breaking global connectivity is bad.   I  don't see networks turning off ipv4.

I would favor differentiation of network characteristics -- eg
Make IPv4 a service just for bulk transfer applications.
make IPv6  the best choice for interactive applications.

-- for example: large Cable providers getting together and agreeing to
implement a 100ms RTT latency penalty for IPv4;  in other words,
heavy buffering of IPv4 traffic,  and heavy oversubscription
(Resulting in greater total performance throughput for data transfers
over Bittorrent or microtransport, but less perception of performance
for interactive applications).

This is probably what they already have,  just stop trying to throttle
IPv4 users,  so to encourage IPv6 adoption -- they just need to make
have some high capacity IPv6 only links, and make it an uncongested
service,  that will provide additional benefits to application
developers to favor it.


Under these conditions,  IPv6 service can be higher.   Don't give it
away for free;
the IPv6  Cable/DSL service should have twice the cost for the end
user as the IPv4 service does,  so that they feel the IPv6 service is
of value,   and  should include all the assistance to achieve the
greater performance.


The exhaustion of IPv4 address space also creates an inertia against
users switching around IPv4 providers (due to insufficient IP address
space available to accommodate build out of new infrastructure);
therefore,  content providers would be incentivized to get people
accessing their site over IPv6.

E.g.
dedicated higher-capacity links for IPv6,  and less buffering to
minimize latency,  that  way  web sites initially get an incentive to
become IPv6-enabled destinations,  in the form of  perceived
improvements in performance;
without breaking connectivity.


  By Date           By Thread  

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