[138163] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Mac OS X 10.7, still no DHCPv6
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Mon Feb 28 17:10:04 2011
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <D34946D8-6148-42B0-996E-C978C0BA790B@hopcount.ca>
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 14:04:09 -0800
To: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
Cc: NANOG Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Feb 28, 2011, at 12:34 PM, Joe Abley wrote:
>=20
> On 2011-02-28, at 15:27, Randy Bush wrote:
>=20
>> o if ipv6 can not operate as the only protocol, and we will be out
>> of ipv4 space and have to deploy 6-only networks, it damned well
>> better be able to stand on its own.
>=20
> Do you think I was suggesting that IPv6 as a protocol doesn't need to =
be able to stand on its own two feet? Because I wasn't; that's patently =
absurd.
>=20
It is both absurd and pretty much exactly what you said.
> However, a fixation on v6-only operation makes no sense for =
general-purpose deployment when most content and peers are only =
reachable via IPv4.
>=20
I guess this is a matter of perspective. For some of us that already =
have complete dual stack deployments,
focusing on the issues present in IPv6-only operation is just the next =
logical step.
In some cases, I would say that the v6-only considerations are well =
worth considering as you prepare
to deploy dual-stack so that you don't deploy dual-stack in such a way =
as to create unnecessary
inter-protocol dependencies that will hurt you later.
The reality is that IPv6-only networks are not likely in the foreseeable =
future is only a true statement
if your foreseeable future ends in the past. There are already a certain =
number of functional operating
deployed IPv6-only networks. Further, it's not going to be more than a =
few months before we start
seeing networks that have very limited or degraded IPv4 capabilities, if =
any, due to the inability to
grant addresses to new networks in some areas.
> I appreciate that there are walled gardens, captive mobile =
applications, telemetry networks and other niche applications for which =
v6-only networks make sense today. I'm not talking about them. I'm =
talking about the network that supports what the average user thinks of =
as the Internet.
>=20
And how do you think the average residential end user is going to see =
the IPv4 internet next year?
> The immediate task at hand is a transition from IPv4-only to dual =
stack, regardless of how many NATs or other transition mechanisms the =
IPv4 half of the dual stack is provisioned through.
>=20
Yes, but, given the nearly immediate runout of IPv4, I would say that =
doing so in a way that best
facilitates IPv6-only hosts being functional is very much worthy of =
consideration in this process.
Owen
