nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 and CDN's
From: Mark Tinka <mark@tinka.africa>
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2021 15:15:57 +0200
On 11/26/21 16:16, Jose Luis Rodriguez wrote:
Well … YMMV. We’ve been running v6 for years, and it didn’t really make a dent in spend or boxes or rate of v4 depletion. Big part of the problem in our neck of the woods is millions of v4-only terminals … as well as large customer/gov bids requiring tons of v4 address space.
I can very easily see why "IPv6 saves you on CG-NAT capex might not be entirely true" in cases such as these.
On paper, it all adds up. Mark.
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Michael Thomas (Nov 27)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Dave Taht (Nov 28)
- RE: IPv6 and CDN's Jean St-Laurent via NANOG (Nov 26)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Mark Tinka (Nov 27)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Grzegorz Janoszka (Nov 27)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Owen DeLong via NANOG (Nov 27)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Michael Thomas (Nov 27)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Owen DeLong via NANOG (Nov 27)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Christopher Morrow (Nov 27)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Owen DeLong via NANOG (Nov 27)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Mark Tinka (Nov 27)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Masataka Ohta (Nov 27)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Mark Tinka (Nov 27)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Masataka Ohta (Nov 27)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Fred Baker (Nov 27)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Masataka Ohta (Nov 27)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Mark Tinka (Nov 28)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Masataka Ohta (Nov 28)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Mark Tinka (Nov 28)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Masataka Ohta (Nov 28)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Mark Tinka (Nov 28)