NANOG 40 agenda posted

Chris L. Morrow christopher.morrow at verizonbusiness.com
Tue May 29 14:34:59 UTC 2007



On Tue, 29 May 2007, John Curran wrote:

>
> At 3:30 PM +0000 5/27/07, Chris L. Morrow wrote:
> >what's going to change this in the near future?
>
> At some point in the near future (e.g. 3 to 5 years),
> an ISP is going to be connecting some customers to
> the 'Internet' using just IPv6 addresses.  It may not
> be your ISP doing it first, but it will very quickly go
> from just one ISP connecting IPv6-only customers
> to lots of ISP's doing IPv6-only customers.

This presumes that there is content or 'reason' (which I short circuited
to 'content' for this discussion) available on the 'v6-internet', or
atleast accessible to  a v6-only client. Other wise having a connection to
a network with nothing and nobody of consequence to that customer isn't
going to fly.

>
> This changeover will not: 1) Fix the routing problem
> inherent with present locator/endpoint binding, nor
> 2) solve your favorite fib/rib/cam/convergence limit,
> nor 3) make the infrastructure inherently either
> easier to operate or more secure.
>

but ipv6 is more secure, yes? :) (no it is not)

> One can argue with the date when this occurs, based
> on your particular address reclamation, reuse, and
> market expectations,  but it's still going to happen
> since there's no other game in town. (*)
>
> At this point, ISP's should make solid plans for supplying
> customers  with both IPv4 and IPv6 connectivity, even
> if the IPv6 connectivity is solely for their web servers and
> mail gateway.  The priority is not getting customers to
> use IPv6, it's getting their public-facing servers IPv6
> reachable in addition to IPv4.

agree.

>
> We've have to move efficiently towards readiness for
> the IPv6-only customer that will be told this is his only
> choice for Internet connectivity.  While some customers
> may shop around or buy their way of that honor, that
> only works for a very short time until the answer is the
> same throughout the network.
>

i agree, though we are back to the chicken/egg scenario with
users/content yes? without users of significance google isn't going to
expend capex/opex to add ipv6 (i do use google in the example purely as an
example, vint might have them busily working on interplanetary IP and ipv6
for all anyone knows) The same goes for every other content place. I'd
venture to guess that even enterprises aren't rushing to ipv6 for very
similar reasons, there are no things their users need/require on an ipv6
only stub, they have other more pressing concerns (virus updates for
instance).

> Actual behavior of ISPs will change as they realize even
> if they're not the first ISP to have to connect customers
> via IPv6-only, they will be face that situation in time.

i'm not disagreeing or saying that ipv6 won't ever get deployed (or even
in time for ipv4 exhaustion) but... chicken/egg, sometime soon folks are
going to have to take it out of hide to start down the v6 path, some one
is going to have to convince their upper management that they really do
need to put this 'new service' that 'no one is asking for' and is 'still
somewhat experimental' (from a hardware/software/OSS perspective atleast)
onto their production infrastructure that is supporting YMillions of $$.



More information about the NANOG mailing list