Re: Artificial Juniper SRX limitations preventing IPv6 deployment (and sales)

[Saku Ytti via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>]

On Thu, 6 Nov 2025 at 16:52, Marco Moock via NANOG
<nanog () lists nanog org> wrote:

> Please tell that the various companies that route IPv6 traffic. All the
> ISP that don't have enough IPv4 want to have more traffic via IPv6 to
> save resources in their NAT gateways.

The entropy of DADDR/SADDR in IPv6 is very low compared to IPv4. Yes
there is some traffic, but it looks artificially good because some
large content providers happen to have it. For most of the world and
people IPv6 continues to be completely immaterial. Very few of my
customers care about IPv6 and it is easy to notice when issues are
IPv6 only, it takes a long time for them to escalate. Vendors stil
ship IPv4 first, or maybe even IPv4 only on some features.

And indeed as someone else mentioned, IPv6 is just more addresses. Any
other argument is just crusade for good or bad cause, but ultimately
crusade which will hurt adoption. Yes IPv6 NAT and NAPT were always
going to be a thing and IPv6 ULA is probably still the best
alternative for enterprise addressing, unless they happen to have
their own globally routable address. We shouldn't try to promote any
other changes with IPv6, except more addresses and keep other crusades
for another time.

Currently we are just helping the incumbents to maintain their
oligarchy by insisting nothing is wrong, trajectory is good and it was
always intended to be dual-stack for decades.

-- 
  ++ytti
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/X757JUR63LEWGNQONDQBG6CVYNQDIA5P/