nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 woes - RFC
From: Saku Ytti <saku () ytti fi>
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2021 11:29:50 +0300
On Wed, 8 Sept 2021 at 11:24, Bjørn Mork <bjorn () mork no> wrote:
Signing such a contract would be pretty stupid from a commercial pov. The growth isn't exponential anymore. It's linear at best. You can probably run just fine with an IPv4 only network after 2040. Not so sure about the IPv6 only network.
This is probably true for large segment of eyeballs. But stakeholders like tier1, cdn and cloudyshops have customer demand for ipv4+ipv6. So they'd all be able to capitalise on ipv4 going away. And if the small, mid size eyeballs knew ipv4 is going away in 10, 15, 20 years whichever it is, then they'd of course have to start moving too, because no upstream. -- ++ytti
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC James R Cutler (Sep 25)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Andy Smith (Sep 25)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Chris Adams (Sep 25)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Masataka Ohta (Sep 26)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Jim Young via NANOG (Sep 26)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Nick Hilliard (Sep 26)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Denys Fedoryshchenko (Sep 22)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Tim Howe (Sep 18)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Tim Howe (Sep 18)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Bjørn Mork (Sep 08)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Saku Ytti (Sep 08)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Fred Baker (Sep 11)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Brian Johnson (Sep 12)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Randy Bush (Sep 12)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Owen DeLong via NANOG (Sep 12)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Randy Bush (Sep 12)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Michael Thomas (Sep 12)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Randy Bush (Sep 12)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Michael Thomas (Sep 12)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Mark Tinka (Sep 13)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Randy Bush (Sep 13)