[184459] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Sat Oct 3 15:29:17 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPPYGuzdLquiqty2y6oCrcf1kfhx2C4iw_JLzvs57Eu_3iuRyw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 12:26:18 -0700
To: Cryptographrix <cryptographrix@gmail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
> On Oct 2, 2015, at 07:48 , Cryptographrix <cryptographrix@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>=20
> For ISPs that already exist, what benefit do they get from
> providing/allowing IPv6 transit to their customers?
>=20
> Keep in mind that the net is now basically another broadcast medium.
It really isn=E2=80=99t. If it were, you wouldn=E2=80=99t have sites =
like Facebook, Youtube, etc. hosting so much UGC.
The net is a two-way medium and it=E2=80=99s getting more and more =
bidirectional, not less so.
Sure, there=E2=80=99s still lots of passively consumed content, but =
there=E2=80=99s more and more interactivity as well.
The benefit to providing/allowing IPv6 transit to their customers is the =
ability to remain in business. There is a time coming when there will be =
IPv6-only features and/or content on the internet due to the shortage of =
IPv4 addresses. We=E2=80=99re already seeing higher performance and =
better throughput on IPv6 due to not having to deal with NAT (and =
possibly other causes) where it is implemented (See data from Facebook & =
VZW for example).
In most cases, the costs of deploying IPv6 in an existing network are =
not that high, so providing a better user experience to your customers =
is usually a net win.
Owen
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 10:33 AM 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
>> 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
>>> 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
>>=20
