[161242] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: What Should an Engineer Address when 'Selling' IPv6 to Executives?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Tue Mar 5 22:16:17 2013
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHDzDLBEF+vAwZZUBY610XEukgR4iGCD32Gq3fzg35aH+AYSSg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2013 19:15:20 -0800
To: "Mukom Akong T." <mukom.tamon@gmail.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mar 5, 2013, at 6:46 PM, Mukom Akong T. <mukom.tamon@gmail.com> =
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 12:34 AM, Mike. <the.lists@mgm51.com> wrote:
>=20
>> I would lean towards
>>=20
>> f) Cost/benefit of deploying IPv6.
>>=20
>=20
> I certainly agree, which is why I propose understanding you =
organisation's
> business model and how specifically v4 exhaustion will threaten that. =
IPv6
> is the cast as a solution to that, plus future unknown benefits that =
may
> result from e-2-e and NAT elimination.
>=20
> I have no clue how to sell 'benefit' of IPv6 in isolation as right now =
even
> for engineers, there's not much of a benefit except more address =
space.
I'm not so sure about that=85
Admittedly, most of these are too technical to be suitable for =
management consumption, but:
1. Decreased application complexity:
Because we will be able to get rid of all that =
NAT traversal code,
we get the following benefits:
I. Improved security
A. Fewer code paths to test
B. Lower complexity =3D less =
opportunity to introduce flaws
II. Lower cost
A. Less developer man hours =
maintaining (or developing) NAT traversal code
B. Less QA time spent testing NAT =
traversal code
C. No longer need to keep the lab =
stocked with every NAT implementation ever invented
D. Fewer calls to support for =
failures in product's NAT traversal code
2. Increased transparency:
Because addressing is now end-to-end =
transparent, we gain a
number of benefits:
I. Improved Security
A. Harder for attackers to hide in =
anonymous address space.
B. Easier to track down spoofing
C. Simplified log correlation
D. Easier to identify source/target =
of attacks
II. Simplified troubleshooting
A. No more need to include state =
table dumps in troubleshooting
B. tcpdump inside and tcpdump =
outside contain the same packets.
Finally=85 There are 7 billion people on the planet. There are 2 billion =
currently on the internet.
The other 5 billion won't fit in IPv4. If you want to talk to them, =
you'll need IPv6.
It doesn't matter how many IPv4 addresses you have. What matters is how =
many people/places/things you want to reach or you want to be reachable =
from that don't have any. Today, that's a small number, but it's =
growing. The growth in that number will only accelerate in the coming =
years.
Today, the IPv6 internet is this big: . Today, the IPv4 internet is =
this big: o
In a few years, the IPv4 internet will still be this big: o and the IPv6 =
internet will be more like this: OOOOO
(Size comparison should be relatively accurate at any font size as long =
as you use the same font and font size for the whole thing.)
Owen
