[137352] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Looking for an IPv6 naysayer...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Cameron Byrne)
Fri Feb 11 15:17:44 2011
In-Reply-To: <67D897E2-EA22-450C-96DB-0D2256433439@delong.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 12:17:40 -0800
From: Cameron Byrne <cb.list6@gmail.com>
To: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
>
> On Feb 11, 2011, at 6:38 AM, Scott Helms wrote:
>
>>
>>> ISPs know it takes years to move a customer base. =A0They should have
>>> been ready years ago. =A0They still arn't ready. =A0I was asking for
>>> what features to look for in a new CPE so that it won't need to be
>>> replaced when they turn on IPv6 and got this as a answer. =A0It really
>>> isn't helpful.
>> Mark,
>>
>> =A0 =A0I certainly wasn't trying to be flip or short and for that I apol=
ogize. =A0To answer the specific question on a CPE that depends both on wha=
t kind of access network you're connecting to as well as if its a service p=
rovider installed/supported device or one that a technical end user can sup=
port him/herself as those are very different use cases.
>>
>> The point I am trying to communicate is that CPE issue not simple, strai=
ghtforward, or cheap because in almost all of the non-DOCSIS cases we're lo=
oking at forklift upgrades.
>>
> Yes, but, let's look at why that is...
>
> The Broadband Forum sat on its ass and ignored IPv6. They failed to publi=
sh IPv6 standards
> until November of last year.
>
> This delayed the implementations in PON and DSL systems.
>
> DOCSIS required forklift upgrades, too. The difference is that Cable Labs=
got out in front of the
> issue and IPv6 was one of many features that required an upgrade to DOCSI=
S 3.
>
> It's not like Broadband Forum didn't have this option.
>
> Sorry... I have little sympathy on that one.
3GPP was in front of it too, IPv6 was accounted for 10 years ago...
but IPv6 3G will require new handsets for all (excluding Nokia, in
some cases) due to the OEMs. For us in mobile, the issue right now is
largely one of handset availability. Now that Nokia is married to
Windows Phone 7, i am concerned they are taking a step backwards since
Windows Phone 7 does not support cellular IPv6.
Cameron
++++++++
http://groups.google.com/group/tmoipv6beta
++++++++
