IP4 Space

Jim Burwell jimb at jsbc.cc
Thu Mar 11 02:46:19 UTC 2010


On 3/10/2010 16:57, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>
>> IMHO, only personally experienced pain is going to push a lot of these
>> sorts of people into ipv6.  By pain, I mean things such as not being
>> able to deploy their new service (web site, email server, VPN box,
>> whatever) on the internet due to lack of ipv4 addresses, having to
>> implement double NAT, CGN/LSN, or being forced to live behind such an
>> arrangement ["what do you mean I can't port forward the port for my
>> favorite game/new service?!?!" (yes, I know some schemes will still
>> allow customer port forwards, but this will be made more difficult,
>> painful, since many users will now be sharing the same publics.)]
>>
>> Once the "pain" hits, many will be doing crash courses in ipv6 and
>> rolling it out as quickly as they can.  I think it's just human
>> nature.  :)
>>
>> - Jim
>>
>>
>
8<---<snip>
>
> I try to avoid being preachy, but, at the same time, there are some
> pretty hard numbers available. It's not the guys on IRC that need
> the most convincing anyway.  They know, and in many cases,
> while they're still in denial, they don't need to change because
> they couldn't get support from above if they did.
>
> The target really needs to be the CxOs and the management,
> especially in places where there is content facing the general
> public.  Fortunately, Google, Yahoo, Netflix, etc. get it and have
> moved forward with IPv6. Some others are coming along.
True.  CxOs can basically order it to be done.  But for the "guys in the
trenches", I often talk about the issues just to give them a heads up,
so they don't get caught off guard when ipv4 exhaustion hits.

Plus, they can also exert pressure upwards that can cause decisions to
be made.  And in the case of small shops and start ups, they often are
the primary decision makers/influencers for all things IT anyway (a
situation I'm very familiar with).

8<---<snip>
> The main thing we need to convey to our colleagues in the IRC
> crowd is that IPv6 really isn't as difficult as some have made
> it out to be.  While it does require some different thinking, mostly
> in the area of address planning, the rest of it is pretty much
> business as usual just like IPv4.
>
> The other hurdle I've encountered is fear about "switching" to
> IPv6. We need to be clear that we aren't "switching" to IPv6,
> we're "adding IPv6 capabilities to the existing IPv4 network".
> The former creates a lot more fear of change than the latter.
Yep.  I always try to convey how similar everything is for day to day
network operations.  I try to tell them that if they understand IPv4
CIDR, subnetting, etc, they're already 3/4 of the way there for IPv6. 
IMHO, address planning for the average company is far simpler under
IPv6.  Typically they'll be given a /48, and then they'll have 64Ki /64s
to use for subnets, and that's it, and often all they'll ever need.  To
me this is simpler than the typical assortment of RFC1918s with heavy
VLSM.  Not to mention the RFC1918 overlap complications that arise with
partnerships, mergers, etc.  :-)

Yes.  I always emphasize dual-stack too.  I tell them to just give it a
try by setting up, say, an HE tunnel to one machine.  Then later
terminate the tunnel to a router and try it on a few more boxes. 
Another thing I do if they're running Vista or Windows 7, is to ping an
IPv6 address, and when Teredo gets them ping replies, I tell them "see,
you're already running IPv6 and have basic connectivity".  Although I
don't know if this is a good idea, since Teredo isn't the most reliable
thing.  :p

> Owen
>
> (Oh, and in case anyone doesn't know, yes, I work for Hurricane
> Electric. I went to work there because I liked what they were doing
> with IPv6. I'd recommend their products (and did) even if I did not
> work there.)
>
I get my IPv6 over an HE 6in4 tunnel.  :-)

I wish my ISP (who shall remain unnamed) provided native IPv6 service,
but this is the response I got last time I inquired:

> Unfortunately, we don't have a status on changing to IPv6. We currently offer only ADSL2, Fiber and T1.
And then after a second inquiry about a few months later:

> We are aware of the IPv4 situation and at this point and time we have no
> plans to switch over to IPv6. 
A shame since I'm otherwise very pleased with this ISP.  I may hit them up again since it's been nearly a year since the last inquiry.  Or at least try to get through to someone other than a TSE or a Billing & Collections Manager.  :)




More information about the NANOG mailing list