cost of dual-stack vs cost of v6-only [Re: IPv6 on SOHO routers?]

Thu Mar 13 16:48:43 UTC 2008

Jamie,

On Mar 13, 2008, at 8:42 AM, Jamie Bowden wrote:
> MS, Apple, Linux, *BSD are ALL dual stack out of the box currently.

The fact that the kernel may support IPv6 does not mean that IPv6 is  
actually usable (as events at NANOG, APRICOT, and the IETF have  
shown).  There are lots of bits and pieces that are necessary for mere  
mortals to actually use IPv6.

> The core is IPv6/dual stack capable, even if it's not enabled  
> everywhere,

I'm told by some folks who run core networks for a living that while  
the routers may sling IPv6 packets as fast or faster than IPv4, doing  
so with ACLs, filter lists, statistics, monitoring, etc., is lacking.   
What's worse, the vendors aren't spinning the ASICs (which I'm told  
have a 2 to 3 year lead time from design to being shipped) necessary  
to do everything core routers are expected to do for IPv6 yet.

> and a large chunk of Asia and Europe are running IPv6 right now.

I keep hearing this, but could you indicate what parts of Asia and  
Europe are running IPv6 right now?  I'm aware, for example, that NTT  
is using IPv6 for their FLETS service, but that is an internal  
transport service not connected to the Internet.  I'm unaware (but  
would be very interested in hearing about) any service in Asia or  
Europe that is seeing significant IPv6 traffic.

> The US Govt. is under mandate to transition to v6 by the end of the  
> year.

I thought parts of the USG were under a mandate to be "IPv6  
capable" (whatever that means) by this summer.  If there is a mandate  
to be running IPv6 within the USG by the end of the year, people are  
going to have to get very, very busy very, very quickly.

> The
> only bits that are missing right now are the routers and switches at  
> the
> edge, and support from transit providers,

My understanding is that there are lots of bits and pieces that are  
missing in the infrastructure, but that's almost irrelevant.  What is  
_really_ missing is content accessible over IPv6 as it results in the  
chicken-or-egg problem: without content, few customers will request  
IPv6.  Without customer requests for IPv6, it's hard to make the  
business case to deploy the infrastructure to support it.  Without  
infrastructure to support IPv6, it's hard to make the business case to  
deploy content on top of IPv6.

> and if they're going to keep
> supplying the Fed with gear and connectivity, at least one major  
> player
> in those areas of the NA market is going to HAVE to make it happen.

Remember GOSIP?

Regards,
-drc