Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Fri Jul 10 16:05:53 UTC 2015


> On Jul 9, 2015, at 23:08 , Ricky Beam <jfbeam at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 21:15:57 -0400, Karl Auer <kauer at biplane.com.au> wrote:
>> Actually I was mentioning thousands.
> 
> Dozens, millions, whatever. Pick something and get on with it already.

I don’t know anyone that’s going to get upset with you if you deploy /48s to end sites.
Sure, there are lots of /56 advocates out there, but none of them are going to cause grief if you use /48 instead.

ALL of the RIRs accept /48 as an end-site assignment without question.

We picked /48 a long time ago. I’m not sure why longer prefixes keep coming up. I think it’s IPv4-think on the
part of people who can’t get their heads out of the scarcity mentality.

>> What you personally don't foresee is pretty much irrelevant to what will
>> actually happen...
> 
> And planning for a future that doesn't happen because you're too caught up in *planning* that future is irrelevant, too.

I’m fully dual-stacked and have a /48 in my house. Do you?

I’ve been implementing IPv6 in various networks for years. I’ve probably dual-stacked more than 100 networks by now.
How many have you done?

I don’t think any of us advocating /48s are sitting here planning without implementing.

>> Like pretty much the entire current generation of net techs, your
>> imagination is limited by your past. But there are kids in school right
>> now who do not suffer from the same limitations - and they will build
>> wonders.
> 
> And in ~15 years when they have a jobs, they can change what we built. (assuming ever let the paint dry long enough to use it.)

I tend to think of the internet more like powder-coating. It goes on dry and often comes out half-baked.

>> PS: People keep dissing "home users" saying how they are incapable of
>> understanding stuff and installing all these complex networks. Twenty
>> years ago getting online at home took lots of know-how; getting more
>> than one device online in the home took even more. Now you can just buy
>> a $50 bit of kit, plug it in and your desktops, laptops, smartphones,
>> tablets, televisions, digital radios and wireless sound systems just
>> work. With main and guest networks, multiple wifi protocols, and in many
>> cases basic IPv6 as well. There is no reason to think that the
>> complexity of future networks will not be equally well packaged for the
>> home.
> 
> 20 years ago was 1995. It took "some" know how (how to run setup.exe on the floppy you ISP sent you.) Windows 95 made it much easier by having that software in the default OS. Building a network took a bit longer to (a) be wanted/needed and (b) be available and affordable in the home. (few people had more than one computer to network in the first place. Today, you have three of them on your person at any given moment.)
> 
> Despite the proliferation of the internet and network tech, the average person today knows even less than two decades ago. Because everything "just works". IPv6 will never get there until it, too, "just works". We're still a long way off in the home -- both because providers aren't doing it, and because the CPE tech is lagging. Mobile by contrast, due to necessity and speed of tech turnover, is there already; you have to intentionally check to know you're using IPv6.

We can agree to disagree… I made good money back then helping home users get their home networks set up because it was too hard for them to do themselves as a side gig.

IPv6 is “just working” for a millions of home users that wouldn’t know it if they (or someone else) didn’t deliberately check. That’s reality today.

The number is growing fairly quickly as well.

Owen






More information about the NANOG mailing list