nanog mailing list archives
Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?
From: Bill Bogstad <bogstad () pobox com>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 13:45:09 -0400
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Mohacsi Janos <mohacsi () niif hu> wrote:
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010, Bill Bogstad wrote:On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Frank Bulk - iName.com <frnkblk () iname com> wrote:Don't forget the home gateway aspect -- it's a huge gaping hole in the IPv6 deployment strategy for ISPs. And don't talk to me about Apple's Airport Extreme. ISPs want (once the volume of IETF IPv6-related drafts has settled down) for every router at Wal-mart to include IPv6 support. If they start right now and presume that home gateways/routers are replaced every 3 to 5 years, it will be several years before they've covered even 50% of the homes.Alternatively, they could commission the vendors to release firmware upgrades with IPv6 support for the most common older devices. Given that many of them are Linux based and the code already exists, this isn't likely to be technically difficult.Yes it is. Most of the home gateways are are manufactured : develop, produce and forget life-cycle. The development codebase, is not existing anymore. The developers are moved to another company.... You barely have support for low-end home gateways after a year of first shipment. In the first year some bugfixing....
That's because they aren't getting paid for maintaining old firmware (razor thin margins). At least in the case of Linux based units, GPL enforcement has for the most part required them to keep better track of their codebase. As a result, I think this is more feasible then you do. Still it WOULD be easier to just work on getting all new equipment IPv6 capable. Both cable and cellphone companies already commission custom firmware for their settop boxes and cell phones, I see no reason that ISPs couldn't do the same.
Start by commissioning IPv6 support into all new hardware. I would think that given the razor thin margins in home gateways/routers extra money coming in for simply turning on code which already exists would be attractive to at least some of them. Come up with some kind of logo for the program "IPv6 READY!".Don't count much on "IPv6 READY!" logo. IPv6 READY usually means, there are some IPv6 support in the device, but it might not work on your particular environment....: no IPv6 on PPPoE, no DHCPv6 support, no IPv6 setting are possible on webinterface....
That's why you make it a trademarked logo and you have licensing requirements that specify what must be included in order for them to use the logo on their marketing materials. The consortium decides what is needed to make IPv6 work for them and enforces it via logo licensing. Frankly if the protocols out of the IETF for things like DHCP/default routes don't make sense, the consortium can simply specify something else. I'm pretty sure that if the spec comes with a sufficiently large check attached the OEMs will implement whatever you want in the firmware. Bill Bogstad
Current thread:
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?, (continued)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? joel jaeggli (Apr 18)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Mikael Abrahamsson (Apr 19)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Leo Bicknell (Apr 19)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? sthaug (Apr 19)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Kevin Loch (Apr 19)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Mohacsi Janos (Apr 19)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Mark Smith (Apr 19)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? joel jaeggli (Apr 18)
- RE: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Frank Bulk - iName.com (Apr 19)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Bill Bogstad (Apr 19)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Mohacsi Janos (Apr 19)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Bill Bogstad (Apr 19)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Leen Besselink (Apr 19)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Mohacsi Janos (Apr 20)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Joe Provo (Apr 19)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Valdis . Kletnieks (Apr 19)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? bmanning (Apr 19)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Owen DeLong (Apr 20)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Mark Smith (Apr 20)
- Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? joel jaeggli (Apr 20)