IPv6 woes - RFC

Saku Ytti saku at ytti.fi
Sun Sep 19 08:04:28 UTC 2021


People who keep thinking this is a technical problem that can be
engineered away are confused. People who think the relative cost of
doing lookup for IPV4/IPV6 is visible to TCO are confused. Just
because you can observe technical differences doesn't mean they are
important, it may mean you're being affected by availability
heuristics bias, you think that the things you understand must contain
the solution to the problem.

IPv6 problem is, very few companies in developed markets need it to do
business, as customers are just bouncing between established players,
no new organic growth. Those companies choosing to do it increase
their cost for no utility, so it is an objectively bad decision for
many to do IPv6.
People who have sentimental attachment to versions of IP protocols are
a minority, most just want that customers continue paying their
invoices and keep accepting the product.

It is almost guaranteed we are married to IPv4 past our life cycles,
because there will be a lot of drivers to keep it. Even though
dual-stack increases cost for our vendors and us, each of us can
transfer the cost to our customers with margins, fixing it would mean
less revenue. Like infosec, it'll want things to remain relatively
broken, as everyone in position to change it are capitalising on
keeping it.



-- 
  ++ytti


More information about the NANOG mailing list