IPv6 Ignorance

Justin Wilson lists at mtin.net
Sun Sep 16 19:19:03 UTC 2012


	Very good points. Having been in the WISP industry for more than 10 years
now. I know WISPs who have thousands of customers and only 1 or 2 class C
addresses.  The need for public routable IP addresses is not that much of
a concern for them.  Plus, a good majority of WISP equipment does not
support IPV6. 

	Sure a WISP is technically an ISP but, like Faisal says, its a much
different business.

	Justin

-----Original Message-----
From: Faisal Imtiaz <faisal at snappydsl.net>
Reply-To: <Faisal at snappydsl.net>
Date: Sunday, September 16, 2012 2:29 PM
To: <nanog at nanog.org>
Subject: Re: IPv6 Ignorance

>Let me shed some light here..... (Being familiar with both
>communities... Nanog and WISP's )
>
>WISP's are a very special breed of folks.  There are a few common
>attributes  that one has to recognize about them.
>1. Most WISP's are not Technical Folks. (Most of them are Farmers or
>from other totally non-technical fields).
>2. Most of them became operators not because they wanted to or it made
>business sense. but simply because there was not Service available in
>that area.
>3. They are very hardworking, innovative group, but at the same time
>they are also a bit on the 'eccentric' side when comes to technology,
>and understanding technology.
>4. Most of them have outsourced folks managing their networks. (these
>folks are very qualified and familiar with networking)
>
>So, in contrast, while  NANOG community is full of folks who develop /
>write RFC's for Global networks, WISP community is mostly Rural folks
>who were forced to 'piece a network' together because no-one would serve
>them....
>
>Don't be alarmed by the discussion on UBNT list or any other WISP
>list.....Most WISP's are typically very small network operators (sub 500
>subscribers, there are some large ones too but their opinions and
>technical understanding is very different.) and tend to setup their
>network the 'Easy way'.... You will find them to be  about the very last
>folks to adapt IPv6...(to make my case and point .... A lot of them are
>still running Bridge Networks, and just starting to convert to Routed
>Networks). They are not known for Leading Edge network operators with
>the exception of when it comes to 'Wireless Radios'.
>
>A lot of them are very comfortable with using Private IP's and NAT to
>provide service to their customers.
>
>Worry about them .... No need.
>Need for Education on IPv6 ... Absolutely Yes.... We all can use as much
>as we can get.
>And, we all are also hampered by IPv6 support / or lack of it, from the
>equipment mfg. that we are using in our networks.
>
>Hope this makes sense.
>
>Faisal Imtiaz
>Snappy Internet & Telecom
>
>On 9/16/2012 1:43 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote:
>> On 9/16/12 9:55 AM, Seth Mattinen wrote:
>>> I came across these threads today; the blind ignorance towards IPv6
>>>from
>>> some of the posters is kind of shocking. It's also pretty disappointing
>>> if these are the people providing internet access to end users. We
>>>focus
>>> our worries on the big guys like AT&T going IPv6 (which I'm sure but
>>> they're slow), but these small operators are a much bigger problem.
>>>
>>> http://forum.ubnt.com/showthread.php?p=355722
>>>
>>> http://forum.ubnt.com/showthread.php?t=53779
>>>
>> It was brought to my attention that the second link isn't open to the
>> public, sorry about that, I forgot to check them in a separate browser.
>> The attitudes are the same though.
>>
>> ~Seth
>>
>>
>
>
>





More information about the NANOG mailing list