nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4
From: Leo Bicknell <bicknell () ufp org>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 11:05:54 -0700
Warning: Hat = Enterprise Network Admin
Sarcasm = High
In a message written on Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 01:31:43PM -0400, Christopher Morrow wrote:
​REALLY??? I mean REALLY? people that operate networks haven't haven't had beaten into their heads: 1) cgn is expensive
Wazzat? Isn't the C for Carrier? So, not my problem.
2) there is no more ipv4 (not large amounts for large deployments of new thingies)
I got a /24 from my provider years ago. I only use half of it. If we needed to economize we could probably go ahead and deploy name based virtual hosting, the server guys have talked about that for years. I can't imagine I will ever run out of IPv4.
3) there really isn't much else except the internet for global networking and reachabilty
IPv4 currently has more reach than IPv6? Didn't you just tell me people aren't deploying IPv6.
4) ipv6 'works' on almost all gear you'd deploy in your network
I can't find it in the docs for our IBM Token Ring switch that connects the payroll mainframe to the ERP NEC box. That's our only critical application.
and content side folks haven't had beaten into their heads: 1) ipv6 is where the network is going, do it now so you aren't caught with your pants (proverbial!) down
I thought all the providers were deploying that CGN thing so IPv4 kept working. They would never leave us high and dry, right?
2) more and more customers are going to have ipv6 and not NAT'd ipv4... you can better target, better identify and better service v6 vs v4 users​.
I was told DNS64 fixed that problem, and carriers would have to deploy it as a transition strategy.
3) adding ipv6 transport really SHOULD be as simple as adding a AAAA
My IPAM software doesn't have AAAA support because I haven't bought a support contract for it for 10 years. Do I really need to buy new IPAM software?
I figure at this point, in 2016, the reasons aren't "marketing" but either: a) turning the ship is hard (vz's continual lack of v6 on wireline services...) b) can't spend the opex/capex while keeping the current ship afloat c) meh
Actually it's more my boss has 100 "critical" initiatives and staff to do 20 of them, and IPv6 isn't even on the list. Our planning window is crisis to crisis, err, I mean quarter to quarter. Will my web site go down this quarter if I don't deploy it? Otherwise we can put that off. Sadly, I wish all these answers were some sort of carachture of reality, but I think they are too many folks reality. -- Leo Bicknell - bicknell () ufp org PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4 Christopher Morrow (Jun 02)
- Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4 Ca By (Jun 02)
- Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4 Christopher Morrow (Jun 02)
- IPv6 is better than ipv4 Ca By (Jun 02)
- Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4 Mike Hammett (Jun 02)
- Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4 Christopher Morrow (Jun 02)
- Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4 Mike Hammett (Jun 02)
- Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4 John Curran (Jun 07)
- Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4 Mikael Abrahamsson (Jun 07)
- Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4 Christopher Morrow (Jun 07)
- Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4 Leo Bicknell (Jun 02)
- Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4 Hugo Slabbert (Jun 02)
- Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4 Jeff McAdams (Jun 02)
- Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4 Christopher Morrow (Jun 02)
- Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4 Jeff McAdams (Jun 02)
- Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4 John Levine (Jun 02)
- Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4 William Herrin (Jun 02)
- Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4 Ca By (Jun 02)
- Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4 Eygene Ryabinkin (Jun 02)
- Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4 Ca By (Jun 06)
