[170179] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Ipv4 end, its fake.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Mon Mar 24 21:41:20 2014
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1403221035250.13760@whammy.cluebyfour.org>
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 17:31:09 -0700
To: "Justin M. Streiner" <streiner@cluebyfour.org>
Cc: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mar 22, 2014, at 7:40 AM, Justin M. Streiner =
<streiner@cluebyfour.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Mar 2014, Cb B wrote:
>=20
>> You can pay $3 per ipv4, that is your business. But, it may be worth =
noting
>> that AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, T-Mobile, TWT, Google Fiber all have =
have
>> double digit ipv6 penetration today.
>=20
> To be fair:
> Verizon Wireless, if you're referring to 4G LTE? Agreed.
> I don't know what the plan is for the remaining 3G services.
I get IPv6 on both 3G and 4GLTE from VZW.
> Verizon Enterprise (what used to be UUNET)? Agreed.
> Verizon Online (Fios, DSL)? I have to disagree. Lots of =
foot-dragging here.
Similar with AT&T Wireless.
If you want to have some fun, open up a ticket with your carrier if you =
can=92t reach http://thegoodlife.delong.com
It has an AAAA record, but no A record.
In my experience, most carriers will not even figure out the nature of =
the problem.
> Most carriers appear to be making IPv6 capability a requirement for =
their LTE buildouts. The only major US carrier that I hears was =
resisting IPv6 was Sprint, and I don't know if their position has =
changed in the past 12 months.
To the best of my knowledge it has not. However, I think a big part of =
that is that sprint thought they could spell 4GLTE using the letters =
W-I-M-A-X.
Owen
