[184460] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Sat Oct 3 15:42:04 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <639A3CAD-88A3-4CAB-BD36-2C0AC0D34B1B@silverlakeinternet.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 12:40:56 -0700
To: Brett A Mansfield <lists@silverlakeinternet.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
> On Oct 2, 2015, at 07:56 , Brett A Mansfield =
<lists@silverlakeinternet.com> wrote:
>=20
> The problem with this is some of us smaller guys don't have the =
ability to get IPv6 addresses from our upstream providers that don't =
support it. And even if we did do dual stack, then we're paying for both =
IPv4 and IPv6 addresses. The cost is just too high. ARIN should give =
anyone with a current IPv4 address block a free equivalently sized IPv6 =
block (256 IPv4 =3D 256 /56s or one /48 IPv6). If they did that, there =
would be a lot more IPv6 adoption in dual stack.=20
False=E2=80=A6 ARIN will charge you the fee for the largest category you =
fall into, v4 or v6, but not both.
So, if you are in the ISP category and have a /22 or less, you=E2=80=99re =
currently not really able to deploy IPv6 for free, but it will only cost =
you $500/year more than what you are already paying to ARIN.
If you have a /20 or less, then you can get IPv6 from ARIN without =
increasing your fees (/36) simply by requesting it. However, you should =
seriously consider requesting a /32 and biting the bullet on the =
$2000/year fee.
There is work in progress on getting ARIN fees brought more in line =
between IPv4 and IPv6 and you may want to consider participating in that =
process and submitting your thoughts to the board for consideration. =
There will be a discussion of this at the upcoming ARIN meeting in =
Montreal. Please attend either in person or remotely and voice your =
thoughts.
If you have more than a /20, then you can easily get a /32 IPv6 just for =
the asking with no fee impact whatsoever.
> I don't understand why anyone would give an end user a /48. That is =
over 65,000 individual devices. A /56 is 256 devices which is the =
standard /24 IPv4. What home user has that many devices??? A /56 to the =
home should be standard. Based on giving each customer a /56, I could =
run my entire small ISP off a single /48. I know there are a lot of IP =
addresses in the IPv6 realm, but why waste them? At the rate were going, =
everything will have an IP address soon. Maybe one day each item of your =
clothing will need their own IP address to tell you if it's time to wash =
or if it needs repair. Stranger things have happened.=20
Clearly you have not taken the time to understand the fundamentals of =
IPv6.
First, a /48 is 65,536 subnets, not 65,000+ devices. Each of those =
subnets can support more than 18 quintillion devices =
(18,446,744,073,709,551,616 to be exact), assuming that the customer =
uses /64 subnets.
A /56 is 256 subnets, and /24s are not really standard for end users in =
IPv4, especially residential users, so I=E2=80=99m not sure what =
you=E2=80=99re talking about there.
You=E2=80=99re thinking like IPv4. In IPv4, we had to count individual =
devices and think about hosts. In IPv6, we want to get completely away =
from that. We also want to pave the way for auto-conf/zero-conf even =
with complex topologies that may evolve.
So a /48 isn=E2=80=99t about being able to support =
295,147,905,179,352,825,856 devices in every home, it=E2=80=99s about =
being able to have 16 bits of subnet mask to use in delegating addresses =
in a dynamic plug-and-play hierarchical topology that can evolve on =
demand without user configuration or intervention.
If you cut that down to 8 bits, you seriously reduce the ability for =
these designs to ever get off the ground.
So=E2=80=A6 IPv6 Lesson 1: Stop counting hosts and start thinking about =
counting subnets=E2=80=A6 Then realize that if you give 65,536 subnets =
to every end-site, you don=E2=80=99t even have to count subnets and move =
on.
There=E2=80=99s no legitimate reason not to give an end-site a /48. =
There is no benefit whatsoever to preserving the scarcity mentality of =
IPv4. Please move forward.
Thanks,
Owen
>=20
> Thank you,
> Brett A Mansfield
>=20
>> On Oct 2, 2015, at 8:27 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
>>=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
>=20
