[125282] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: legacy /8
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Andrews)
Sun Apr 11 20:54:11 2010
To: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
From: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 11 Apr 2010 13:52:24 -1000."
<54701FCF-13EA-44DA-8677-26A7C6635EF1@virtualized.org>
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 10:53:53 +1000
Cc: Paul Vixie <vixie@isc.org>, nanog@merit.edu
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
In message <54701FCF-13EA-44DA-8677-26A7C6635EF1@virtualized.org>, David Conrad
writes:
> On Apr 11, 2010, at 10:57 AM, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > i'd like to pick the easiest problem and
> > for that reason i'm urging dual-stack ipv4/ipv6 for all networks new =
> or old.
>
> Is anyone arguing against this? The problem is what happens when there =
> isn't sufficient IPv4 to do dual stack.
On the client side you will still be dual stack and also be using
PNAT (single, double or distributed) to more efficiently use the
available IPv4 addresses.
There will be service providers that provide client address pools
for those that can't get IPv4 addresses themselves using technologies
like ds-lite to transport the traffic.
On the server side you will be able to purchase the use of a IPv4
address and the packets will be tunneled back to you socks like.
Eventually most of the traffic will switch to being IPv6 and providers
of theses services will disappear as they are no longer profitable
to run.
Mark
> Regards,
> -drc
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
