nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 on SOHO routers?
From: Andrew Burnette <acb () acb net>
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 14:34:39 -0400
Leo Bicknell wrote:
In a message written on Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 03:06:24PM -0500, Frank Bulk - iNAME wrote:Furthermore, he stated that networking equipment companies like Cisco will be moving away from IPv4 in 5 years or so. This is the first time I've heard this posited -- I had a hard believing that, but he claims it with some authority. Anyone hear anything like this? My own opinion is that we'll see dual-stack for at least a decade or two to come.ISP's are very good at one thing, driving out unnecessary cost. Running dual stack increases cost. While I'm not sure about the 5 year part, I'm sure ISP's will move to disable IPv4 support as soon as the market will let them as a cost saving measure. Runing for "decades" dual stacked does not make a lot of economic sense for all involved.
labels in the core, for a long while.This transition will be about as smooth as the US moving to the metric system. (e.g. everyone buys soda in two liter bottles, wine in 750ml bottles, but can't mentally buy liters of gasoline....or 1.1826 liters of beer, aka 'forty').
Same could be said for the Auto Industry. Thank [some dead mathematician] that 3/4" lug nuts are also 19mm or we'd really be screwed :-)
No flag day here (I would pay serious money to see that happen though, it would be a total riot from the get go). There is some interesting movement in the US in particular to put up 'enough' v6 window dressing to be compliant with US gov't contracts and so on which will match up with the OMB [unfunded] mandate to be IPv6 compatible by this june.
As for the SOHO, not sure if anything other the next chip revision and firmware are needed. Besides, will they be NAT boxen with a dozen application layer gateway helpers like today? Or will they be actual firewalls. Hard to say which is more difficult or code complex. With the pace of silicon replacement in SOHO product lines, the next silicon spin could do the either stack or both for the same cost.
best regards, andy
Current thread:
- Re: cost of dual-stack vs cost of v6-only [Re: IPv6 on SOHO routers?], (continued)
- Re: cost of dual-stack vs cost of v6-only [Re: IPv6 on SOHO routers?] John Curran (Mar 13)
- Re: cost of dual-stack vs cost of v6-only [Re: IPv6 on SOHO routers?] Randy Bush (Mar 13)
- Re: cost of dual-stack vs cost of v6-only [Re: IPv6 on SOHO routers?] David Conrad (Mar 13)
- Re: cost of dual-stack vs cost of v6-only [Re: IPv6 on SOHO routers?] Stuart Henderson (Mar 13)
- Re: cost of dual-stack vs cost of v6-only [Re: IPv6 on SOHO routers?] Andrew Burnette (Mar 13)
- Re: cost of dual-stack vs cost of v6-only [Re: IPv6 on SOHO routers?] David Conrad (Mar 13)
- Re: cost of dual-stack vs cost of v6-only [Re: IPv6 on SOHO routers?] Justin M. Streiner (Mar 13)
- Re: cost of dual-stack vs cost of v6-only [Re: IPv6 on SOHO routers?] Kevin Oberman (Mar 13)
- RE: cost of dual-stack vs cost of v6-only [Re: IPv6 on SOHO routers?] michael.dillon (Mar 14)
- RE: cost of dual-stack vs cost of v6-only [Re: IPv6 on SOHO routers?] michael.dillon (Mar 14)
- RE: IPv6 on SOHO routers? Frank Bulk - iNAME (Mar 12)
- RE: IPv6 on SOHO routers? Mikael Abrahamsson (Mar 12)
- Re: IPv6 on SOHO routers? Mark Newton (Mar 12)
- Re: IPv6 on SOHO routers? Joel Jaeggli (Mar 13)