[111300] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Timmins)
Tue Feb 3 13:23:14 2009
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 13:22:16 -0500
From: Paul Timmins <paul@telcodata.us>
To: Zaid Ali <zaid@zaidali.com>
In-Reply-To: <10812089.471233685164238.JavaMail.zaid@turing-2.local>
Cc: Roger Marquis <marquis@roble.com>, nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Zaid Ali wrote:
> I don't consider IPv6 a popularity contest. It's about the motivation and the willingness to. Technical issues can be resolved if you and people around you are motivated to do so. I think there are some hard facts that need to be addressed when it comes to IPv6. Facts like
>
> 1. How do we migrate to a IPv6 stack on all servers and I am talking about the
> thousands of servers that exist on peoples network that run SaaS,
> Financial/Banking systems.
>
Just upgrade your load balancer (or request a feature from your load
balancer company) to map an external IPv6 address to a pool of IPv4
servers. Problem solved.
> 2. How do we make old applications speak IPv6? There are some old back-end systems
> that run core functions for many businesses out there that don't really have any
> upgrade path and I don't think people are thinking about this.
>
Continue to run IPv4 internally for this application. There's no logical
reason that IPv4 can't continue to coexist for decades. Heck, people
still run IPX, right?
-Paul
