[99030] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: An informal survey... round II
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (michael.dillon@bt.com)
Thu Aug 30 10:41:18 2007
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 15:35:47 +0100
In-Reply-To: <p06240802c2fc76cac326@[192.168.3.65]>
From: <michael.dillon@bt.com>
To: <nanog@merit.edu>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
> Consider large ISP's that can no longer obtain from the large=20
> blocks (e.g. /12 to /16) but instead must beg/barter/borrow=20
> blocks from others which are several orders of magnitude=20
> smaller (e.g. /16 through /24) every week to continue=20
> growing... such obtained blocks would be announced into the=20
> routing system very rapidly as we try to keep
> IPv4 running post depletion of the free address pool. When=20
> this inflection point is reached, how much headroom do we=20
> have given equipment being deployed today?
You have described a pretty desperate state of affairs. Given that the =
route announcements are part of the public record, this is tantamount to =
holding a press conference and telling everyone that your business is in =
a pretty desperate state and you are scrambling just to keep your head =
above water in the hopes that it will stave off disaster long enough for =
you to get a proper solution deployed.
I wonder how many companies will let things get this bad when IPv6 is =
right here, right now, and mitigates against this kind of disastrous =
state of affairs? I wonder how many investment analysts will note that =
companies without a solid IPv6 deployment plan in 2008 and 2009, are =
likely to start hemorrhaging in 2010 as customers scramble to find a =
stable supplier before the inevitable day of doom?
People keep saying that there is no business case for IPv6 when the =
answer is staring them in the face. Growing revenue is the absolute =
fundamental core of any business case, and in telecom companies that is =
generally directly tied into growing the network. If your fancy new IPTV =
home banking package deal depends on connecting new customers to your =
network, lack of IP addresses will stop your provisioning process dead =
in its tracks. And that stops growth dead in its tracks. And that shows =
that all the money that management invested in the fancy new IPTV home =
banking package was actually wasted (or shall we say misdirected) =
investment like all that fancy d=E9cor on the Titanic.
In general, telecoms companies (read ISPs) are trying to move up the =
value chain, but any product which depends on network connectivity =
probably has a direct dependence on growing the network. This means it =
is directy dependent on a steady supply of fresh IP addresses. We =
stopped manufacturing IPv4 addresses a long time ago. ARIN and ICANN =
have issued end-of-life announcements for IPv4 addresses. Does it make =
any business sense at all to bet the farm on products which only work =
using IPv4 addresses?
The fact is that IPv6 and IPv4 can interwork quite well so it is not a =
great technical feat to make IPv6 products that work. It certainly costs =
more up front to develop such products, but I doubt that anyone has done =
a real cost analysis comparing this to marketing costs, and other softer =
product development costs. Companies can introduce expensive products =
and still make money at it. Cutting prices to the bone is not the only =
way to make money. Engineers like to exclaim that IPv6 costs too much, =
but engineers rarely ever have the data to quantify exactly what that =
cost is and why it is too much.=20
In fact, IPv6 doesn't cost too much. Lots of companies are using it =
today. Government agencies are installing it because the Federal =
government's GAO thinks that IPv6 is money well spent, i.e. it does NOT =
cost too much. IPv6 is appearing with more frequency on RFPs, not just =
in questions about future plans, but as a real requirement for service =
today. Many customers will be satisfied with Hexago boxes connected to =
your IPv4 network. More will be satisfied with Softwires across an IPv4 =
network. They will be exstatic if you offer 6PE over MPLS (or dual =
stack) and geographically diverse IPv6 peering. IPv6 is real and moaning =
about how hard it is will not make it go away, especially when it gets =
on your CEO's radar.
--Michael Dillon
P.S. rant directed at the IPv6 naysayers, not the many people on this =
list who are deploying IPv6 today or at least planning their deployments =
for next year.
