Netflix banning HE tunnels

Fri Jun 10 18:54:35 UTC 2016

> Also, the Randy who closed the ngtrans working group "declar[ing] victory"  
> yet having produced nothing.

in the ietf, that is a victory indeed! :)  from slide 9, "430 transition
mechanisms."  the problem is they were and are a mess.  so the iesg
decided to stop the farce.  of course, folk kept inventing new wonderful
mechanisms, e.g. dual-stack lite, where you not only get NAT in the core
but get to fork-lift all your cpe; a real win.

but, underlying all this is that v6 and v4 were dead incompatible on the
wire.  and there was/is no magic.  so all 'transition' mechanisms are by
nature ugly, have scaling issues, sell a lot of expensive iron, ...

and it's not like folk were not screaming in pain as the ietf went down
this insanely arrogant and stupid path.

> Dual stack is not a transition plan, and never has been.

some of us shed a lot of blood trying to explain that to deering,
hinden, and other worshipers.  not very successfully.

> It's a key factor in why we have such a fractured adoption today.

this i do not buy.  dual stack allowed some backbones to get v6 to the
edge.  this did not fragment adoption, it was just far from a scalable
total solution.  then again, nothing else is very pretty either.  the
tragedy is that there are now more folk using cgns than ipv6.  the nat
haters have created the worst nats in the world; justice, but not the
kind of justice i like.

> If you've been completely ignoring IPv6 for 20 years

have not, though i suspect our bean counters wish we had.  it's been a
very expensive road.  our first deployment was on a truly dual stack
backbone, separate circuits and separate routers (netbsd boxes as v6
traffic was small) as j&c did not support dual stack, heck any stack.

randy