[184458] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Sat Oct 3 15:25:49 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <BY1PR0701MB1781B3F09D44A77B0723F778FA4B0@BY1PR0701MB1781.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 12:22:21 -0700
To: Steve Mikulasik <Steve.Mikulasik@civeo.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
The majority of the large eyeball providers in the US are already doing =
this to most, if not all, of their customers.
Comcast I believe has 100% IPv6 availability to residential and I think =
they are most of the way on Business too.
I=92m not sure of the percentage, but I know Time Warner Cable is well =
underway with their IPv6 deployment.
Even AT&T is making progress on their DSL and u-Verse services.
Verizon FIOS is a laggard, which is interesting given that VZW was the =
first and still has the best Cellular IPv6 deployment in the US
(IPv6 ONLY insisting on manufacturers implementing 464XLAT is inferior =
in every way to dual stack, so T-Mo loses and to the best of my =
knowledge, SPRINT still can=92t spell IPv6 to save their life)
I don=92t think any of the MVNOs have any IPv6 capability yet.
So the problem you are suggesting we focus on is mostly a solved =
problem. Content Providers are progressing, modulo some serious =
laggards, notably Amazon and a few others.
The reality, however, is that in terms of deprecating IPv4, there does =
need to be a focus on consumer electronics, device support, home router =
support and it=92s quite overdue. Fortunately, we=92re finally starting =
to see some movement in that area.
Owen
> On Oct 2, 2015, at 07:27 , Steve Mikulasik <Steve.Mikulasik@civeo.com> =
wrote:
>=20
> I think more focus needs to be for carriers to deliver dual stack to =
their customers door step, whether they demand/use it or not. Small ISPs =
are probably in the best position to do this and will help push the big =
boys along with time. If we follow the network effect (reason why IPv4 =
lives and IPv6 is slowly growing), IPv6 needs more nodes, all other =
efforts are meaningless if they do not result in more users having IPv6 =
delivered to their door.=20
>=20
> I think people get too lost in the weeds when they start focusing on =
device support, home router support, user knowledge, etc. Just get it =
working to the people and we can figure out the rest later.
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mark Andrews
> Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 6:01 PM
> To: Matthew Newton <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk>
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption
>=20
>=20
> In message <20151001232613.GD123100@rootmail.cc.le.ac.uk>, Matthew =
Newton writes:
>=20
> Additionally it is now a OLD addressing protocol. We are about to see =
young adults that have never lived in a world without IPv6. It may not =
have been universally available when they were born but it was =
available. There are definitely school leavers that have never lived in =
a world where IPv6 did not exist. My daughter will be one of them next =
year when she finishes year 12. IPv6 is 7 months older than she is.
>=20
> Some of us have been running IPv6 in production for over a decade now =
and developing products that support IPv6 even longer.
>=20
> We have had 17 years to build up a universal IPv6 network. It should =
have been done by now.
>=20
> Mark
>=20
>> --
>> Matthew Newton, Ph.D. <mcn4@le.ac.uk>
>>=20
>> Systems Specialist, Infrastructure Services, I.T. Services, =
University=20
>> of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom
>>=20
>> For IT help contact helpdesk extn. 2253, <ithelp@le.ac.uk>
> --
> Mark Andrews, ISC
> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
>=20
