[181950] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mike Hammett)
Thu Jul 9 03:58:57 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 15:10:55 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <95889F21-A4D6-4A6F-8B88-4DF40BBA7414@beckman.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Tell a start-up ISP it'll be $10k - $25k for PI IPs and they'll laugh in yo=
ur face.=20
-----=20
Mike Hammett=20
Intelligent Computing Solutions=20
http://www.ics-il.com=20
Midwest Internet Exchange=20
http://www.midwest-ix.com=20
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mel Beckman" <mel@beckman.org>=20
To: "Owen DeLong" <owen@delong.com>=20
Cc: nanog@nanog.org=20
Sent: Wednesday, July 8, 2015 2:37:53 PM=20
Subject: Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion=20
Owen,=20
Paying for IPv4 space definitely raises the capital requirements for any ne=
w provider startup. It's not so bad right now, when deals are plentiful in =
the $10k to $20k range for /24s. But when a /24 hits $100K, bootstrapping a=
new ISP will be impossible.=20
-mel beckman=20
> On Jul 8, 2015, at 12:32 PM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:=20
>=20
> I think the =E2=80=9CTHING=E2=80=9D that people are starting to worry abo=
ut is how to deploy a network when you can=E2=80=99t get IPv4 space for it =
at a reasonable price.=20
>=20
> Owen=20
>=20
>> On Jul 8, 2015, at 11:47 , Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu> wrote:=20
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>>> On 8/Jul/15 17:59, Mel Beckman wrote:=20
>>> Greg,=20
>>>=20
>>> After investigating what a previous poster said about Cisco and Juniper=
, I'm getting the feeling that not all major impediments to running MPLS ov=
er IPv6-only networks have been addressed.=20
>>>=20
>>> Your comment mentions LDP IPv6 support. Do you now handle all the major=
gaps identified the the IETF MPLS IPv6 Gap Analysis (RFC7439) from this la=
st January?=20
>>>=20
>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7439#section-3=20
>>>=20
>>> It seems like their are still gaps in the MPLS spec itself before IPv6 =
has parity with IPv4 in MPLS.=20
>>=20
>> The LDPv6 support is just the control plane portion to get labels=20
>> assigned to IPv6 addresses. This should get you basic forwarding of=20
>> encapsulation and forwarding of IPv6 traffic in MPLS. The immediate=20
>> use-case would be removal of IPv6 BGP routing in the core, if that is=20
>> your thing.=20
>>=20
>> Otherwise, yes, there are still a bunch of MPLS gaps that need to be=20
>> fixed for those additional services to run natively over an IPv6-only=20
>> network. Baby steps...=20
>>=20
>> Mark.=20
>=20
