Re: sigs wanted for a response to the fcc's NOI for faster broadband speeds

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

On 12/1/23 16:45, Shane Ronan wrote:
> Unfortunately from my experience it's usually because the small local 
> ISPs don't have the resources to understand IPv6, and may be using 
> equipment generations old that may not support IPv6. It's the large ISPs 
> that don't want to do it because it would increase their operational 
> costs and require upgrades to operational systems and they see no new 
> revenue associated.

Honestly, how old is your equipment at this point to not support IPv6 at 
all or usably in the data plane and in-band parts of the control plane? 
I wouldn't think it's even commercially relevant anymore.  Pretty much 
anything L3 with at least 10Gb ports probably has support for most 
things relevant to a small local ISP.

You might be missing some niceties, but even some new stuff is missing 
those.  The big one I've seen is a nice way to handle DHCPv6-PD 
delegations without having to resort to using BGP to inject the routes 
(looking at you, Extreme SLX).

--
Brandon Martin