[162557] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: "It's the end of the world as we know it" -- REM
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Thu Apr 25 09:26:41 2013
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <8C48B86A895913448548E6D15DA7553B821172@xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:25:33 -0400
To: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
Cc: "<nanog@nanog.org>" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
> Frankly, the ISPs likely to be tracking this list aren't the people =
holding back there. To pick on one that is fairly public, Verizon =
Wireline is running dual stack for at least its FIOS customers, and also =
deploying CGN, and being pretty up front about the impacts of CGN. =
Verizon Wireless, if I understand the statistics available, is estimated =
to have about 1/4 of its client handsets accessing Google/Yahoo/Facebook =
using IPv6.
>=20
> =
http://www.verizon.com/support/residential/internet/highspeedinternet/netw=
orking/troubleshooting/portforwarding/123897.htm
> =
http://www22.verizon.com/Support/Residential/Internet/HighSpeed/General+Su=
pport/Top+Questions/QuestionsOne/ATLAS8742.htm
> http://www.worldipv6launch.org/measurements/
>=20
As an iPhone 5 user on VZW, I can say that they have done a really good =
job of deploying IPv6 on both 3GPP and LTE networks. My phone runs =
dual-stack everywhere I'm not roaming so far. Performance over IPv6 has =
been at least as good as performance over IPv4.
While I'm not a huge VZW fan, they really have done this well and other =
carriers should look to them as a model for IPv6 deployment on cellular.
The one unfortunate aspect is that if you are on an IPv4-only WiFi =
network, you will be unable to access any IPv6 sites via the carrier =
network and they will, instead, fail. For the moment, while there are =
not many IPv6-only websites, this is probably not a significant =
drawback. It's probably intended as a workaround for the "IPv6 =
Unexpected Data Bill" problem.
> Where we're having trouble is in enterprise and residential =
deployments. Enterprise tends to view the address space run-out as =
Somebody Else's Problem - behind their NATs, they generally have enough =
address space to work with. On the residential side, the X-Box is still =
IPv4-only, Skype is still IPv4-only, the vast majority of residential =
gateways used by broadband subscribers are IPv4-only.
"We have enough address space" doesn't really take into account the fact =
that you probably aren't on the internet only to talk to yourself. If =
you want the users behind your NAT to be able to talk to the InterNET =
and not just the IPv4 InterNAT, then you're going to need to give them =
some form of IPv6 capability.
The residential side is a problem which I believe will solve itself =
relatively quickly over the next 5-7 years. The cost of maintaining =
residential IPv4 service beyond that point (indeed, even to that point) =
is going to result in costs per subscriber that exceed current billing =
rates. Just to break even, most providers will have to convince their =
subscribers to pay approximately double what they currently pay while =
accepting progressively more degraded IPv4 service.
Indeed, there are some models emerging that show that the cost of lost =
customers by switching residential to IPv6-only is likely less than the =
cost of maintaining customers on IPv4.
> Some broadband ISPs are taking steps toward a managed service =
offering, by selling their customers a replacement router. If the router =
is IPv6-capable, that helps.
This is becoming more popular. Other ISPs are also specifying =
IPv6-compatible equipment that their customers can upgrade to.
> If we really want to help the cause, I suspect that focusing attention =
on enterprise, and finding ways to convince them that address shortages =
are also their problem, will help the most.
Actually, if you want to have the biggest and best impact, it's getting =
the rest of the Alexa 1,000 onto IPv6.
Eyeball and Enterprise conversion will happen soon enough out of =
necessity. However, if content is still not available on IPv6 at that =
point, it will drive strange contortions to attempt to keep IPv4 on =
progressively more complex and delicate forms of life support. If the =
content is all available on IPv6, then it will be mostly a non-event to =
start turning up IPv6-only end-users.
Owen
