why use IPv6, was: Lazy network operators

Mon Apr 19 04:25:07 UTC 2004

On Apr 18, 2004, at 1:06 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:

> On 18-apr-04, at 12:16, Patrick W.Gilmore wrote:

>> Those are semi-nice features.  Not sure I would use it as an excuse 
>> to migrate, though, since the need for them can easily be avoided in 
>> v4.
>
> Sure. But I do find myself saying "if we were doing IPv6 right now we 
> wouldn't have this problem" more and more.

If you completed that thought, you would realize, "but I'd have so many 
more problems which are so much harder to overcome (if it is even 
possible to overcome them), that it really ain't worth it."

Of course, many technologies start out as inferior cousins to existing 
stuff.  Just not usually "version 6"....

>>> Multihoming can be done the same way many people do it for IPv4: 
>>> take addresses from one ISP and announce them to both. Obviously 
>>> your /48 will be filtered, but as long as you make sure it isn't 
>>> filtered between your two ISPs, you're still reachable when the link 
>>> to either fails. However, this means renumbering when switching to 
>>> another primary ISP. Not much fun, despite the fact that renumbering 
>>> is much easier in IPv6.
>
>> This does not address the issue.  If my /48 is filtered, I am still 
>> at the mercy of the provider with the super-CIDR.  If that network is 
>> down, so am I.
>
> True. However, many people don't get to do better than this in v4 
> either.

Anyone who tries and does not use one of the handful of providers who 
filter does.  IOW: This is a non-argument.

The point still stands - without real multi-homing so I do not have to 
be dependent upon a single vendor, IPv6 is simply not an option.

Quick Meta-Question: Why was was this even considered when v6 was being 
engineered?  Are the people who started the v6 movement really that 
out-of-touch with reality?  Or were they arrogant enough to believe 
they could limit control to a few entities and the user base would just 
go along with it?

-- 
TTFN,
patrick