[59033] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jared Mauch)
Thu Jun 12 13:42:36 2003
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 13:42:54 -0400
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.Nether.net>
To: Andy Dills <andy@xecu.net>
Cc: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.Nether.net>,
Irwin Lazar <ILazar@burtongroup.com>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.44.0306121253270.86799-100000@thunder.xecu.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 01:14:30PM -0400, Andy Dills wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jun 2003, Jared Mauch wrote:
>
> > I honestly see most of the backbone providers offering
> > native IPv4 and IPv6 services in the next few years. Contact
> > your provider as you can probally get in on any beta service
> > offerings they currently have.
>
> Am I the only one that thinks IPv6 is a minimum of ten years out before
> you see actual non-geek demand?
What I continuously remind myself is the transformation of the
internet from 10 years ago to now. When you look at what has happened
in comparison, I wouldn't rule this out at all. Obviously IPv4 is going
to be the primary for internetworks for some time but I do expect
traffic levels at the IPv6 exchanges to pick up. Personally, I find
some mirrors I connect to have a IPv6 address where they don't
rate-limit it, so when the next release of RH/FreeBSD come out, it's
quicker to download via IPv6 than IPv4 as there are no contention issues
for gaining access to the ftp server.
I see people doing IPv6 deployments but not quite as fast as
the IPv4 deployment speed of the past 10 years, but with most sites
enabled in the next 3-5 years at most.
- Jared
--
Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared@puck.nether.net
clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.
