IP4 Space

Sat Mar 6 21:32:39 UTC 2010

My first reply to this thread. I've been kind of tracking it.

I would love to move to IPv6. However, the IPv6 addressing, I have to say, is
really tough to remember and understand for most people. Where is a four number
dotted quad was easy to remember, an IPv6 address.. not so much. I wished they
had made that a little easier when they were drafting up the protocol specs.
basically, you need technical knowledge to even understand how the IP address is
split up. I wished ARIN would waive the fee for service provider's first block
of IPv6 as well. It would help make the dual stack deployment easier.

I know IPv4 is running out. I understand the situation. I just wished they had
put a little more thought into the user experience side of the addressing. You
can all flog me now if you want. I expect it. I'm green on IPv6. I would love
the education if I am wrong.

-S

Mark Newton wrote:
> On 06/03/2010, at 1:06 AM, David Conrad wrote:
> 
>> Mark,
>>
>> On Mar 4, 2010, at 11:46 PM, Mark Newton wrote:
>>> On 05/03/2010, at 2:50 PM, David Conrad wrote:
>>>> When the IPv4 free pool is exhausted, I have a sneaking suspicion you'll quickly find that reclaiming pretty much any IPv4 space will quickly become worth the effort.
>>> Only to the extent that the cost of IPv6 migration exceeds the cost
>>> of recovering space.
>> You're remembering to include the cost of migrating both sides, for all combinations of sides interested in communicating, right?  In some cases, that cost for one of those sides will be quite high.
> 
> Yes, but I only need to pay the cost of my side.
> 
>>> There's sure to be an upper-bound on the cost of v4 space, limited by the
>>> magnitude of effort required to do whatever you want to do without v4.
>> The interesting question is at what point _can_ you do what you want without IPv4.  It seems obvious that that point will be after the IPv4 free pool is exhausted, and as such, allocated-but-not-efficiently-used addresses will likely become worth the effort to reclaim.
> 
> That isn't a likely outcome, though.  We'll never need to do "without IPv4",
> it'll always be available, just in a SP-NATted form which doesn't work very 
> well.
> 
> Continuing to put up with that state of affairs comes with its own set of
> costs and obstacles which need to be weighed up against the cost of 
> migrating to dual-stack (unicast global IPv6 + SPNAT IPv4) to extract yourself
> from the IPv4 tar-baby.  Not migrating will be increasingly expensive
> over time, the costs of migrating will diminish, each individual operator
> will reach their own point when staying where they are is more expensive
> than getting with the program.
> 
> And most of the participants on this mailing list will probably reach
> that point sooner than they think.
> 
> My mom will probably never see a need to move beyond IPv4.  But her next
> door neighbor with the bittorrent client and WoW habit probably will, and
> any content provider who's interested in having a relationship with their
> eyeballs which isn't intermediated by bollocky SPNAT boxes probably will too.
> 
> Horses for courses.
> 
> What I do know is that this "migrating to IPv6 is expensive so nobody wants
> to do it," is a canard that's been trotted out for most of the last decade
> as a justification for doing nothing.
> 
> As an ISP that's running dual-stack right now, I can tell you from personal
> experience that the cost impact is grossly overstated, and under the 
> circumstances is probably better off ignored.
> 
> Just sayin'.
> 
>   - mark
> 
> --
> Mark Newton                               Email:  newton at internode.com.au (W)
> Network Engineer                          Email:  newton at atdot.dotat.org  (H)
> Internode Pty Ltd                         Desk:   +61-8-82282999
> "Network Man" - Anagram of "Mark Newton"  Mobile: +61-416-202-223
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 