IPv6 woes - RFC

Fri Sep 24 01:48:30 UTC 2021

> On Sep 23, 2021, at 6:49 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sep 23, 2021, at 12:50 , Brian Johnson <brian.johnson at netgeek.us> wrote:
>> 
>> Side question on this thread…
>> 
>> Is it everyones current expectation that if a provider were to switch to IPv6 and drop IPv4 that the customers would all be just fine with that? I believe that there are several applications used by some of the the loudest customers (typically gamers and network gurus), not to mention some business applications that would break or be sub-optimal at best. I see CGN as the band aid to this issue, not the cure to the problem.
> 
> Today? no.
> 
> At some point when a relatively small number of remaining laggards among major content providers move forward? Yes.

So do we just bleed out in the mean time?

> 
> Do you really think that those applications/vendors wouldn’t move quickly if a couple of major eyeball providers announced “Effective X date”, we’re going to start offering a $X/month discount to any customer(s) who are willing to stop using IPv4.

I’d be happy to suggest this to my clients, but it’s not a real thing yet. Plus, the average human (even the average CSR at a small regional provider network) has no idea what this means.

> 
> You an only cover an arterial bleed with a band-aid for so long before it becomes silly, septic even. If you’re wondering how quick that point is coming up, I suggest you check your mirrors.

Triage suggests that you assist in succession of the current bleeding before being concerned about the next time you are cut. I have BGN deployments that have been in place for 4+ years with little customer knowledge. It has allowed clients to avoid the IPv4 market issues, and in some instances, become a source for others to help compensate for the initial CGN expense.

I totally agree with you in spirit, but I am working on the problem of now, not the problem of some point in the future. The cost of CGN is becoming less expensive than IPv4 space acquisition. I wish this weren’t true.

> 
> Owen
> 
>> 
>> Discuss…?
>> 
>> - Brian
>> 
>>> On Sep 23, 2021, at 10:46 AM, Owen DeLong via NANOG <nanog at nanog.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> There are real issues with dual-stack, as this thread started out with.
>>>> I don't think there is a need neither to invent IPv6 problems, nor to
>>>> promote IPv6 advantages.  What we need is a way out of dual-stack-hell.
>>> 
>>> I don’t disagree, but a reversion to IPv4-only certainly won’t do it.
>>> 
>>> I think the only way out is through. Unfortunately, the IPv6 resistant forces
>>> are making that hard for everyone else.
>>> 
>>> Owen
>>> 
>> 
> 