[158251] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mikael Abrahamsson)
Tue Nov 27 00:32:48 2012
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 06:32:27 +0100 (CET)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: "Dobbins, Roland" <rdobbins@arbor.net>
In-Reply-To: <B03DCF2A-3F47-4E2B-BC19-1B0ADC6B3B31@arbor.net>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
> Yet everyone (except you) insist that it does work with everything, and
> that all this CGN and 444 stuff and 644 stuff isn't necessary, and that
> I'm a fool for doubting all these (to me) wildly overoptimistic
> assertions about the coming ubiquity of native IPv6, end-to-end, heh.
Dual stack works with "everything". IPv6 only access does not (with
464XLAT it might). However, people are complaining that operators are
focusing more on CGN and NAT44(4) than they are on IPv6. Which I can
understand, but I believe we're getting closer to getting out of the dead
lock. My hope is that 2013 is going to be the year we're going to see
widespread IPv6 (dual stack) adoption on mobile devices outside of the US.
It's looking good so far.
People are advocating dual stack now (at least that's what I do), for a
future goal of IPv6 only.
The main problem with IPv6 only is that most app developers (most
programmers totally) do not really have access to this, so no testing is
being done.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
