Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

[Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net>]

I believe he (at least someone) was looking for recommendations to CGN type devices. Many can do NAT, but looking for 
something a bit more intelligent. Your standard residential user may not understand, but would also be unwilling to pay 
any difference. 




----- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Mel Beckman" <mel () beckman org> 
To: "Josh Moore" <jmoore () atcnetworks net> 
Cc: johnl () iecc com, nanog () nanog org 
Sent: Sunday, July 5, 2015 9:12:37 AM 
Subject: Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion 

Josh, 

Your job is simple, then. Deliver dual-stack to your customers and if they want IPv6 they need only get an IPv6-enabled 
firewall. Unless you're also an IT consultant to your customers, your job is done. If you already supply the CPE 
firewall, then you need only turn on IPv6 for customers who request it. With the right kind of CPE, you can run MPLS or 
EoIP and deliver public IPv4 /32s to customers willing to pay for them. Otherwise it's private IPv4 and NAT as usual 
for IPv4 traffic. 

-mel via cell 

> On Jul 5, 2015, at 6:57 AM, Josh Moore <jmoore () atcnetworks net> wrote: 
>
> We are the ISP and I have a /32 :) 
>
> I'm simply looking at the best strategy for migrating my subscribers off v4 from the perspective of solving the 
> address utilization crisis while still providing compatibility for those one-off sites and services that are still on 
> v4. 
>
>
>
>
> Thanks, 
>
> Joshua Moore 
> Network Engineer 
> ATC Broadband 
> 912.632.3161 
>
> On Jul 5, 2015, at 9:55 AM, Mel Beckman <mel () beckman org> wrote: 
>
> > > Josh Moore wrote: 
> > >
> > > Tunnels behind a CPE and 4to6 NAT seem like bandaid fixes as they do not give the benefit of true end to end IPv6 
> > > connectivity in the sense of every device has a one to one global address mapping. 
> >
> > No, tunnels do give you one to one global IPv6 address mapping for every device. From a testing perspective, a 
> > tunnelbroker works just as if you had a second IPv6-only ISP. If you're fortunate enough to have a dual-stack ISP 
> > already, you can forgo tunneling altogether and just use an IPv6-capable border firewall. 
> >
> > William Waites wrote: 
> > > I was helping my 
> > > friend who likes Apple things connect to the local community 
> > > network. He wanted to use an Airport as his home gateway rather than 
> > > the router that we normally use. Turns out these things can *only* do 
> > > IPv6 with tunnels and cannot do IPv6 on PPPoE. Go figure. So there is 
> > > not exactly a clear path to native IPv6 for your lab this way. 
> >
> > Nobody is recommending the Apple router as a border firewall. It's terrible for that. But it's a ready-to-go 
> > tunnelbroker gateway. If your ISP can't deliver IPv6, tunneling is the clear path to building a lab. If you have a 
> > dual-stack ISP already, the clear path is to use an IPv6-capable border firewall. 
> >
> > So you are in a maze of non-twisty paths, all alike :)