misunderstanding scale (was: Ipv4 end, its fake.)
Lee at asgard.org
Tue Mar 25 13:55:21 UTC 2014
On 3/24/14 9:12 PM, "Bob Evans" <bob at FiberInternetCenter.com> wrote:
>I agree with "one" thing herein....
>> In order for IPv6 to truly work, everyone needs to be moving towards
>Yep, chicken and the egg. I agree. We built an IPv6 "native" network - no
>tunneling - no customers to speak of ... didn't even bother to start IPv6
>peering on it.
How would there be traffic if you have no peering?
>An there you have it, how much is someone willing to pay for space in the
>Internet casino. Well, it's much more than free and probably close to the
>dollar level in the presentation by Lee Howard at an ARIN meeting (I think
>it was in Barbados or maybe I have that meeting place wrong and it was
>NANOG) ... Well, $40/month per IP address will be the pain level for all
>customers to finally cash-in the IPv4 chips and move to IPv6.
I wish it was Barbados!
>Thus far, IPv6 has been the "Field of Dreams" .... those of us who have
>built it, we know they have not yet come (the IPv6 customers). That's
>all this discussion is really about is "when will they come".
Some of us have quite a few IPv6 customers:
And we see significant traffic from those users. :-)
>I know the core of the Internet will be IPv4 for many years. All one has
>to do is talk to a few customer to find out that they are in no hurry.
>It's a no-brainer, because , none of us charges a customer more than than
>lunch money for an IPv4 address.
Depends on what you mean by "core." For some values of "core," the
Internet is already dual-stack.
>Now, if you tell me all the porn site owners were great net citizens,
>ready to move to IPv6 and shut off IPv4 access, well then I can see things
>moving along much faster.
Feel free to offer them a discount for dual-stack, and a deeper discount
Unfortunately, I don't know any porn site operators, so I haven't been
able to have conversations with them about the economics of IPv6.
More information about the NANOG