Looking for comments

Fri Jul 23 00:17:21 UTC 2010

On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 23:57:22 +0100
Nick Hilliard <nick at foobar.org> wrote:

> On 22/07/2010 22:38, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> > As for those two scenarios (IPv6-only ISPs and IPv6-only clients, to simplify
> > them), the document doesn't place them as first preference solutions.
> > However, the fact is that various *extremely* large operators find themselves
> > more or less forced into these scenarios by IPv4 exhaustion.
> 
> Some of the extremely large operators have found themselves having to 
> deploy ipv6 extensively in order to manage CPE devices and their 
> infrastructure networks.  However, I'm not aware of any large provider 
> which is deploying ipv6-only customer access products, either due to a 
> shortage of ipv4 space or any other reason.  If you can supply names of 
> providers doing this, I'd be very interested to hear.
> 

Does this qualify? What the customer sees is delivered over IPv6,
unlike the CPE management problem, where the ISP is the "IPv6 customer".

"IPv6: The Future of IPTV? In Japan it isn't the future, it's now."
http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3795086/IPv6-The-Future-of-IPTV.htm

> That's not to say that they won't start doing this relatively shortly. 
> And you correctly point out that we need to create solutions _now_ so 
> that access providers will have feature equivalence when they start 
> deploying ipv6 in anger on access / hosted networks.
> 
> This is a cue to get people on this list to shout at their vendors for 
> ipv6 feature equivalence on their favourite kit.
> 
> Nick
> 