Re: AWS Elastic IP architecture

[Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>]

On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 9:02 PM, Ca By <cb.list6 () gmail com> wrote:
> On Monday, June 1, 2015, Mark Andrews <marka () isc org> wrote:
> > In message
> > <CAL9jLaYXCdfViHbUPx-=rs4vSx5mFECpfuE8b7VQ+Au2hCXpMQ () mail gmail com>
> > , Christopher Morrow writes:
> > > So... I don't really see any of the above arguments for v6 in a vm
> > > setup to really hold water in the short term at least.  I think for
> > > sure you'll want v6 for public services 'soon' (arguably like 10 yrs
> > > ago so you'd get practice and operational experience and ...) but for
> > > the rest sure it's 'nice', and 'cute', but really not required for
> > > operations (unless you have v6 only customers)
> >
> > Everyone has effectively IPv6-only customers today.  IPv6 native +
> > CGN only works for services.  Similarly DS-Lite and 464XLAT.

ok, and for the example of 'put my service in the cloud' ... the
service is still accessible over ipv4 right?

> Agreed. Here is some data.
>
> It's worth noting that the Samsung Galaxy S6 launched with IPv6 on by
> default at AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobile.
>
> And the majority of the T-Mobile at Verizon customer base is on IPv6, so
> IPv4 is the minority right now in mobile. Oh, and when i say ipv4 is the
> minority i mean NAT44.
>
> Proper public ipv4 is not even on the mobile radar, but ipv6 is

but.. http/s to an ipv4 address works, so...