Re: IPv6 allocation plan, security, and 6-to-4 conversion

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

> On Jan 30, 2015, at 09:39 , William Herrin <bill () herrin us> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Tore Anderson <tore () fud no> wrote:
> > * William Herrin
> >
> > > Plan on dual-stacking any network which requires
> > > access to IPv4 resources such as the public Internet.
> >
> > For many folks, that's easier said than done.
> >
> > Think about it: If everyone could just dual-stack their networks, they
> > might as well single-stack them on IPv4 instead; there would be no
> > point whatsoever in transitioning to IPv6 for anyone.
>
> Hi Tore,
>
> That's what NAT is for. Use RFC 1918 space for end users, RFC 6598
> space for ISPs.

And here I thought NAT was merely a tool used by sadists to satisfy masochists.

Oh, wait… We’re saying the same thing.

> Plan on dual-stacking until IPv6 deployment is ubiquitous. Which won't
> be this year. Or next.

I think you’re right about this year, Not completely sure about next year.
Current growth rates in the two protocols suggest at least that there will
be more devices with unique IPv6 addresses than IPv4 addresses somewhere
in the latter half of next year.

I guess it depends on your definition of ubiquitous, but to me, when a protocol
has the majority of the deployed addresses, I think it counts for this purpose.

Owen