Re: RIPE our of IPv4

[Brandon Martin <lists.nanog () monmotha net>]

On 12/3/19 10:04 AM, Fernando Gont wrote:
> Wwll, yeah.. you don't need IPv4 addresses if you are going to be using
> somebody else's networks and services. Not that you should, though....

OTOH, many many organizations, especially outside of service providers, 
in fact DO such a thing.  I'd suspect your average mid-size business 
these days really in fact does not "need" any IPv4 addresses to conduct 
their ordinary and even many extraordinary operations.

As long as you can make IPv4 HTTP/HTTPS destinations work to handle the 
long tail of non-IPv6 web destinations out there, I bet most people 
wouldn't even notice, and the only reason the IT folks would notice 
would be during testing/troubleshooting or the fact that their machine 
suspiciously has no RFC1918 nor public IPv4 address configured on it.

Most organizations do indeed outsource most of their IT functions in one 
way or another, and it's pretty easy these days to pick outsourcing 
partners for most common business needs that are indeed natively 
IPv6-enabled.  The remainder probably run over HTTP/HTTPS, anyway, and 
are easily translatable at the service provider level.

I'd certainly not (yet) say that that's a recommended configuration, but 
I suspect it would often work.  I certainly have IPv6-only testbeds. 
There's a few groaners usually, but a surprisingly large amount of stuff 
"just works".
--
Brandon Martin