Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

[Ca By <cb.list6 () gmail com>]

On Thursday, October 1, 2015, Matthew Kaufman <matthew () matthew at> wrote:

> On 10/1/2015 5:16 PM, Ca By wrote:
>
> > I run a large 464xlat dominated mobile network.
> >
> > IPv4 bits are materially more expensive to deliver.
>
> Isn't that simply a consequence of your engineering decision to use
> 464xlat instead of native dual-stack, as was originally envisioned for the
> transition?
Steady state would be nat44, which also is materially more expensive to
deliver than IPv6

> > And, as FB has shared, IPv6 is more performant for end users, and more
> > performant is more profitable
> Isn't that also at least partially a consequence of your engineering
> decision to use 464xlat?
Perhaps. But it is Verizon's dual-stack in the quote, not me

http://www.lightreading.com/ethernet-ip/ip-protocols-software/facebook-ipv6-is-a-real-world-big-deal/a/d-id/718395




> Matthew Kaufman