V6 still not supported

Mon Apr 4 12:00:53 UTC 2022

My apologies for expressing myself poorly.

What I meant to say is that this is primarily a problem caused by Sony and the Sonys of the world. Less so a problem inherent to IPv4. A root cause fix would address Sony's hostile behavior.

- Jared

Jordi Palet wrote:

No, isn't only a Sony problem, becomes a problem for every ISP that has customers using Sony PSN and have CGN (NAT444), their IP blocks are black-listed when they are detected as used CGN. This blocking is "forever" (I'm not aware of anyone that has been able to convince PSN to unblock them). Then the ISP will rotate the addresses that are in the CGN (which means some work renumbering other parts of the network).

You do this with all your IPv4 blocks, and at some point, you don't have any "not black-listed" block. Then you need to transfer more addresses.

So realistically, in many cases, for residential ISPs it makes a lot of sense to analyze if you have a relevant number of customers using PSN and make your numbers about if it makes sense or not to buy CGN vs transfer IPv4 addresses vs the real long term solution, which is IPv6 even if you need to invest in replacing the customer CPEs.

Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet

El 30/3/22, 21:02, "NANOG en nombre de Jared Brown" <nanog-bounces+jordi.palet=consulintel.es at nanog.org en nombre de nanog-isp at mail.com> escribió:

    Not to necessarily disagree with you, but that is more of a Sony problem than an IPv4 problem.

    - Jared

    Jordi Palet wrote:

    It is not a fixed one-time cost ... because if your users are gamers behind PSP, Sony is blocking IPv4 ranges behind CGN. So, you keep rotating your addresses until all then are blocked, then you need to transfer more IPv4 addresses ...

    So under this perspective, in many cases it makes more sense to NOT invest in CGN, and use that money to transfer up-front more IPv4 addresses at once, you will get a better price than if you transfer them every few months.

    Regards,
    Jordi
    @jordipalet

    El 30/3/22, 18:38, "NANOG en nombre de Jared Brown" <nanog-bounces+jordi.palet=consulintel.es at nanog.org en nombre de nanog-isp at mail.com> escribió:

        Randy Carpenter wrote:
        > >> >> Owen DeLong via NANOG wrote:
        > >> >> When your ISP starts charging $X/Month for legacy protocol support
        > >> >
        > >> > Out of interest, how would this come about?
        > >>
        > >> ISPs are facing ever growing costs to continue providing IPv4 services.
        > >  Could you please be more specific about which costs you are referring to?
        > >
        > >  It's not like IP transit providers care if they deliver IPv4 or IPv6 bits to
        > >  you.
        >
        > Have you priced blocks of IPv4 addresses lately?
          IPv4 address blocks have a fixed one-time cost, not an ongoing $X/month cost.

        - Jared