Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

Hardware upgrades aren’t difficulty inherent in the protocol.

Sure, everyone has to upgrade their hardware sometimes. Whether it’s to get IPv6 capable hardware or to address some 
other need, periodic hardware upgrades are a simple fact of life.

However, if TW put up IPv6 tomorrow as dual-stack, your firewall would not stop working, you just wouldn’t be able to 
use IPv6 until you upgraded.

Owen

> On Oct 1, 2015, at 19:52 , Curtis Maurand <cmaurand () xyonet com> wrote:
>
> If Time Warner (my ISP) put up IPv6 tomorrow, my firewall would no longer work. I could put up a pfsnse or vyatta box 
> pretty quickly, but my off the shelf Cisco/Linksys home router has no ipv6 support hence the need to replace the 
> hardware. There's no firmware update for it supporting ipv6 either. There would be millions of people in the same 
> boat.
>
> Cheers, 
> Curtis
>
> On October 1, 2015 5:44:46 PM ADT, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:
>
>  On Oct 1, 2015, at 12:06 , Curtis Maurand <cmaurand () xyonet com> wrote:
>  
>  
>  
>  On 10/1/2015 2:29 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>  On Oct 1, 2015, at 00:39 , Baldur Norddahl <baldur.norddahl () gmail com> wrote:
>  
>  On 1 October 2015 at 03:26, Mark Andrews <marka () isc org> wrote:
>  
>  Windows XP does IPv6 fine so long as there is a IPv4 recursive
>  server available.  It's just a simple command to install IPv6.
>  
>         netsh interface
> ipv6 install
>  
>  If the customer knew how to do that he wouldn't still be using Windows XP.
>  
>  
>  Actually I don't expect Gmail and Facebook to be IPv4 only forever.
>  
>  Gmail and Facebook are already dual stack enabled. But I do not see
>  Facebook turning off IPv4 for a very long time. Therefore a customer that
>  only uses the Internet for a few basic things will be able to get along
>  with being IPv4-only for a very long time.
>  
>  Yes and no…
>  
>  I think you are right about facebook.
>  
>  However, I think eventually the residential ISPs are going to start charging extra
>  for IPv4 service. Some residences may pay for it initially, but if they think there’s a
>  way to move away from it and the ISPs start fingerpointing to the specific laggards,
>  you’ll see a groundswell of consumers pushing to find alternatives.
>  
>  Owen
>  
>  ipv6 is going to force a lot of consumers to replace hardware. Worse, it's not easy to set up and get right as ipv4 
> is.
>  
>  --Curtis
>
> You’re going to have to elaborate on that one…. I think IPv6 is actually quite a bit easier than IPv4, so please 
> explicate
> in what ways it is harder to set up and get right?
>
> For the average household, it’s plug the IPv6-capable router in and let it go.
>
> For more advanced environments, it might take nearly as much effort as IPv4 and the unfamiliarity might add a couple
> of additional challenges the first time, but once you get past that, IPv6 has a lot of features that actually make it
> easier than IPv4.
>
> Not having to deal with NAT being just one of the big ones.
>
> Owen
>
>
> -- 
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.