Re: AWS Elastic IP architecture

[Ca By <cb.list6 () gmail com>]

On Monday, June 1, 2015, Mark Andrews <marka () isc org> wrote:

> In message <CAL9jLaYXCdfViHbUPx-=
> rs4vSx5mFECpfuE8b7VQ+Au2hCXpMQ () mail gmail com <javascript:;>>
> , Christopher Morrow writes:
> > So... I don't really see any of the above arguments for v6 in a vm
> > setup to really hold water in the short term at least.  I think for
> > sure you'll want v6 for public services 'soon' (arguably like 10 yrs
> > ago so you'd get practice and operational experience and ...) but for
> > the rest sure it's 'nice', and 'cute', but really not required for
> > operations (unless you have v6 only customers)
>
> Everyone has effectively IPv6-only customers today.  IPv6 native +
> CGN only works for services.  Similarly DS-Lite and 464XLAT.
> Sometimes you can get away w/o IPv6, sometimes you can't.  In all
> cases IPv4 is getting more and more expensive to support as more
> customers share public IP addresses even if it is just have to
> re-tune rate limits to account for the sharing.
>
> Agreed. Here is some data.

It's worth noting that the Samsung Galaxy S6 launched with IPv6 on by
default at AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobile.

And the majority of the T-Mobile at Verizon customer base is on IPv6, so
IPv4 is the minority right now in mobile. Oh, and when i say ipv4 is the
minority i mean NAT44.

Proper public ipv4 is not even on the mobile radar, but ipv6 is

http://www.worldipv6launch.org/measurements/

CB


> Mark
> --
> Mark Andrews, ISC
> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka () isc org
> <javascript:;>