[111302] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Zaid Ali)
Tue Feb 3 13:32:59 2009
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 10:32:48 -0800 (PST)
From: Zaid Ali <zaid@zaidali.com>
To: Paul Timmins <paul@telcodata.us>
In-Reply-To: <49888B58.5060008@telcodata.us>
Cc: Roger Marquis <marquis@roble.com>, nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Yes we all go to NANOG meetings and talk about these solutions but the change has to come from within. its not just a technical solution. There has to be motivation and incentive for people to make this change.
Zaid
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Timmins" <paul@telcodata.us>
To: "Zaid Ali" <zaid@zaidali.com>
Cc: "Roger Marquis" <marquis@roble.com>, nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 3, 2009 10:22:16 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space
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
