IPv6 is better than ipv4

Thu Jun 2 18:05:54 UTC 2016

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 at ufp.org
PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 811 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20160602/5abc894c/attachment.sig>