IPv6 routing /48s

Jack Bates jbates at brightok.net
Tue Nov 18 17:56:18 UTC 2008

Christopher Morrow wrote:
> if you want v6 adoption... latency, path length, jitter, performance
> all should closely match v4 specs. Expecting a US customer to be 'ok'
> with 300ms to reach a US site 30 miles (as the crow flies) via
> Germany... not good.
> V6 so far doesn't have the same $$ and interest from the 'user' so
> it's not being optomized yet. Or so it seems.

Until the peering topology of v6 matches v4, we will continue to see 
this issue. I expect to wait until the last minute when the NSP's 
suddenly realize that they need to switch, and as my dual stack peerings 
increase, so will the QOS. At that point, the content providers will add 
AAAA and the eyeball networks will have the worst of it. M$ seems to be 
coming along fine with IPv6, but the problem we'll see is all those 
modems/routers which do not support it and probably can't with the 
minimal flash space they have. I haven't even seen good alternatives yet 
to start pushing my customers into IPv6 routers.


More information about the NANOG mailing list