[83143] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: /8 end user assignment?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Daniel Golding)
Fri Aug 5 12:38:29 2005
Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 12:38:00 -0400
From: Daniel Golding <dgolding@burtongroup.com>
To: Steve Feldman <feldman@twincreeks.net>,
"Christopher L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow@mci.com>
Cc: Daniel Roesen <dr@cluenet.de>, <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20050804224948.GA88755@twincreeks.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On 8/4/05 6:49 PM, "Steve Feldman" <feldman@twincreeks.net> wrote:
>
>> I meant to ask this at a nanog or this IETF... why don't some of the
>> larger content providers (google, msn, yahoo, to name 3 examples) put AAAA
>> records in for their maint content pieces? why don't they get v6
>> connectivity from their providers (that offer such services) ? There are
>> starting to be more and more folks with v6 connectivity... it'd be
>> interesting as a way to drive usage on v6, eh?
>
> (I work for a not-quite-as-large content player. These are my own
> opinions, but this is what I'd tell my empolyer if they asked.)
>
> - We can't get provider-independent IPv6 space (without pretending
> to be a service provider.)
>
> - None of our transit providers appear to provide IPv6 transit.
> Or if they do, they keep it pretty quiet. (Does UUNET?)
>
> - Most of our content is delivered via load balancer hardware
> that would also need to support IPv6. Last time I checked,
> it didn't.
>
> - There are (perceived to be) more important things to spend
> our limited resources on.
>
> Steve
Why should content providers be at all interested in driving v6 usage? They
are interested in meeting demand, innovating, collecting ad revenue, etc.
The ROI to the given content provider is what? There ARE more important
things to spend one's limited resources on.
- Dan
