|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
From: tvest@eyeconomics.com In-Reply-To: <88ac5c711001280447m453dd39aqf99e9f3246be9d65@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 08:11:35 -0500 To: Richard Barnes <richard.barnes@gmail.com> Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org On Jan 28, 2010, at 7:47 AM, Richard Barnes wrote: > What I've heard is that the driver is IPv4 exhaustion: Comcast is > starting to have enough subscribers that it can't address them all out > of 10/8 -- ~millions of subscribers, each with >1 IP address (e.g., > for user data / control of the cable box). But then that begs the question of why lots of other very large retail = Internet access providers have not indicated that they're committed to = the same course of action (?). They're certainly not the only provider that employs a public IP = address-intensive access model, so where are the other retail IPv6 trial = announcements/pre-announcements? If they start appearing with some frequency real soon now, then maybe = it's just a time-until-overflow issue. If not, then maybe there are = other/better explanations. TV=20 > On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:55 AM, Kevin Oberman <oberman@es.net> = wrote: >>> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 20:59:16 -0800 >>> From: "George Bonser" <gbonser@seven.com> >>>=20 >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: William McCall >>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 7:51 PM >>>> Subject: Re: Comcast IPv6 Trials >>>>=20 >>>> Saw this today too. This is a good step forward for adoption. = Without >>>> going too far, what was the driving factor/selling point to moving >>>> towards this trial? >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> SWAG: Comcast is a mobile operator. At some point NAT becomes very >>> expensive for mobile devices and it makes sense to use IPv6 where = you >>> don't need to do NAT. Once you deploy v6 on your mobile net, it is = to >>> your advantage to have the stuff your mobile devices connect to also = be >>> v6. Do do THAT your network needs to transport v6 and once your net = is >>> ipv6 enabled, there is no reason not to leverage that capability to = the >>> rest of your network. /SWAG >>>=20 >>> My gut instinct says that mobile operators will be a major player in = v6 >>> adoption. >>=20 >> SWAG is wrong. Comcast is a major cable TV, telephone (VoIP), and >> Internet provider, but they don't do mobile (so far). >> -- >> R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer >> Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) >> Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) >> E-mail: oberman@es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634 >> Key fingerprint:059B 2DDF 031C 9BA3 14A4 EADA 927D EBB3 987B 3751 >>=20 >>=20 >=20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |