marka at isc.org
Mon Sep 17 21:28:00 UTC 2012
In message <CAD6AjGRbGK8FZLz-TpL3OGO4trEZ917SBVC_D9YhH9M28fN5oQ at mail.gmail.com>
, Cameron Byrne writes:
> On Sep 17, 2012 5:04 AM, "Tom Limoncelli" <tal at whatexit.org> wrote:
> > My biggest fear is that statements like this will take on a life of their
> > " I can dual stack, then I am not out of IPv4 addresses, and thus I
> > have no need for IPv6. If I'm out of IPv4 then I need IPv6 and I can't
> > dual stack." http://forum.ubnt.com/showthread.php?p=355722
> > Not true but it certainly sounds logical to the average person.
> > What creates this impression is that there is no "deadline". The IPv4
> > -> Dual Stack -> pure IPv6 transition is complex so everyone focuses
> > on "IPv4 -> Dual Stack" forgetting that it is a transition step. The
> > final step seems so far off that people ignore it, and therefore the
> > justification for the first step fades.
> > (the remainder of this post is brainstorming; apply a grain of salt)
> > There are ways to fix this. For example there was a deadline for when
> > Dual Stack was to go away, a "Dual Stack 10 year count-down" would
> > drive the point home. However nothing like this exists.
> > This thread is making me think that I should change how I talk about
> > IPv6 publicly. I need to put more emphasis on DS as being a temporary
> > thing. It is in my mind but perhaps not in how I speak.
> I tell folks that if ipv4 run-out is the problem in eyeball networks, then
> DS cannot be the solution since it has the same problematic reliance on a
> scarce ipv4 resource.
You can go dual stack today and introduce CGN / DS-lite .... tomorrow.
The point is to light up IPv6 *now* and the simplest way to do that
is DS. No one ever said DS was a long term solution. It was
always only the first step along the path.
> I spent a lot of time focusing on ipv6-only networking for mobile and in
> many cases, thanks to world v6 launch and ipv6-only based access network
> transition schemes (ds-lite, MAP, 464xlat) they can provide a solution for
> eyeball networks that is one step away from ipv6-only. .... Instead of DS,
> which is just one step beyond ipv4-only with a foggy road to getting off
> scarce / expensive / broken ipv4
And look at the extra hacks that are needed to tether with the
current mobile solution of going IPv6 only and not supporting PD
from day one. Mobile networks also have the advantage of tech
refresh happening as you go from 2G -> 3G -> 4G.
Most eyeball networks are different to mobile networks. You have
a large base of IPv4 based networks connected to your network which
contain some IPv4 equipement that cannot be upgraded.
> Content networks are a different beast that must be dual-stack to reach all
> the eyeballs
> > The problem with picking a 10-year or 5-year "campaign" is that
> > underestimating the amount of time makes us look like "the sky is
> > falling" and too long gives people a reason to procrastinate.
> > Then again... I believe what will make the biggest # of people adopt
> > IPv6 will be if they see everyone else adopting it. That's why it is
> > so important for IPv6 to be offered by default to all new ISP
> > customers, that tech-savy enterprises need to deploy it, and so on.
> > It is all about building a critical mass.
> > Tom
> > --
> > Speaking at MacTech Conference 2012. http://mactech.com/conference"
> > http://EverythingSysadmin.com -- my blog
> > http://www.TomOnTime.com -- my videos
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka at isc.org
More information about the NANOG