[158277] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Andrews)
Tue Nov 27 15:34:55 2012
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
From: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 27 Nov 2012 17:47:00 BST."
<alpine.DEB.2.00.1211271746210.27834@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 07:34:24 +1100
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
In message <alpine.DEB.2.00.1211271746210.27834@uplift.swm.pp.se>, Mikael Abrahamsson writes:
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
>
> > Obviously, they deployed IPv6 for other reasons, and it would be far
> > more useful to know *why* they deployed it in the first place (i.e., as
> > an experiment, because their user base is outstripping their IPv4
> > allocations, etc.).
>
> IPv6 deployment is not a short-term answer to IPv4 exhaustion. Can we
> please just put this to rest?
But it will reduce the dollars that need to be spent to continue
to prop up IPv4. Every IPv6 packet sent is one less packet that
needs to be processed by the CGN *farm*.
Split the bill so you can see the IPv4 and IPv6 traffic components
and add a CGN loading on the IPv4 traffic.
Mark
> --
> Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
>
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
