AWS Elastic IP architecture

Tue Jun 2 01:12:58 UTC 2015

On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 9:02 PM, Ca By <cb.list6 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Monday, June 1, 2015, Mark Andrews <marka at isc.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> In message
>> <CAL9jLaYXCdfViHbUPx-=rs4vSx5mFECpfuE8b7VQ+Au2hCXpMQ at mail.gmail.com>
>> , Christopher Morrow writes:
>> > So... I don't really see any of the above arguments for v6 in a vm
>> > setup to really hold water in the short term at least.  I think for
>> > sure you'll want v6 for public services 'soon' (arguably like 10 yrs
>> > ago so you'd get practice and operational experience and ...) but for
>> > the rest sure it's 'nice', and 'cute', but really not required for
>> > operations (unless you have v6 only customers)
>>
>> Everyone has effectively IPv6-only customers today.  IPv6 native +
>> CGN only works for services.  Similarly DS-Lite and 464XLAT.

ok, and for the example of 'put my service in the cloud' ... the
service is still accessible over ipv4 right?

> Agreed. Here is some data.
>
> It's worth noting that the Samsung Galaxy S6 launched with IPv6 on by
> default at AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobile.
>
> And the majority of the T-Mobile at Verizon customer base is on IPv6, so
> IPv4 is the minority right now in mobile. Oh, and when i say ipv4 is the
> minority i mean NAT44.
>
> Proper public ipv4 is not even on the mobile radar, but ipv6 is

but.. http/s to an ipv4 address works, so...