[184393] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Fri Oct 2 14:19:30 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <2BB18527-2F9C-4FEE-95DD-3F89919A8049@xyonet.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 11:10:30 -0700
To: Curtis Maurand <cmaurand@xyonet.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Hardware upgrades aren=E2=80=99t difficulty inherent in the protocol.
Sure, everyone has to upgrade their hardware sometimes. Whether it=E2=80=99=
s to get IPv6 capable hardware or to address some other need, periodic =
hardware upgrades are a simple fact of life.
However, if TW put up IPv6 tomorrow as dual-stack, your firewall would =
not stop working, you just wouldn=E2=80=99t be able to use IPv6 until =
you upgraded.
Owen
> On Oct 1, 2015, at 19:52 , Curtis Maurand <cmaurand@xyonet.com> wrote:
>=20
> If Time Warner (my ISP) put up IPv6 tomorrow, my firewall would no =
longer work. I could put up a pfsnse or vyatta box pretty quickly, but =
my off the shelf Cisco/Linksys home router has no ipv6 support hence the =
need to replace the hardware. There's no firmware update for it =
supporting ipv6 either. There would be millions of people in the same =
boat.
>=20
> Cheers,=20
> Curtis
>=20
> On October 1, 2015 5:44:46 PM ADT, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> =
wrote:
>=20
> On Oct 1, 2015, at 12:06 , Curtis Maurand <cmaurand@xyonet.com> =
wrote:
> =20
> =20
> =20
> On 10/1/2015 2:29 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> On Oct 1, 2015, at 00:39 , Baldur Norddahl =
<baldur.norddahl@gmail.com> wrote:
> =20
> On 1 October 2015 at 03:26, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:
> =20
> Windows XP does IPv6 fine so long as there is a IPv4 recursive
> server available. It's just a simple command to install IPv6.
> =20
> netsh interface
> ipv6 install
> =20
> If the customer knew how to do that he wouldn't still be using =
Windows XP.
> =20
> =20
> Actually I don't expect Gmail and Facebook to be IPv4 only forever.
> =20
> Gmail and Facebook are already dual stack enabled. But I do not see
> Facebook turning off IPv4 for a very long time. Therefore a customer =
that
> only uses the Internet for a few basic things will be able to get =
along
> with being IPv4-only for a very long time.
> =20
> Yes and no=E2=80=A6
> =20
> I think you are right about facebook.
> =20
> However, I think eventually the residential ISPs are going to start =
charging extra
> for IPv4 service. Some residences may pay for it initially, but if =
they think there=E2=80=99s a
> way to move away from it and the ISPs start fingerpointing to the =
specific laggards,
> you=E2=80=99ll see a groundswell of consumers pushing to find =
alternatives.
> =20
> Owen
> =20
> ipv6 is going to force a lot of consumers to replace hardware. Worse, =
it's not easy to set up and get right as ipv4 is.
> =20
> --Curtis
>=20
> You=E2=80=99re going to have to elaborate on that one=E2=80=A6. I =
think IPv6 is actually quite a bit easier than IPv4, so please explicate
> in what ways it is harder to set up and get right?
>=20
> For the average household, it=E2=80=99s plug the IPv6-capable router =
in and let it go.
>=20
> For more advanced environments, it might take nearly as much effort as =
IPv4 and the unfamiliarity might add a couple
> of additional challenges the first time, but once you get past that, =
IPv6 has a lot of features that actually make it
> easier than IPv4.
>=20
> Not having to deal with NAT being just one of the big ones.
>=20
> Owen
>=20
>=20
> --=20
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
