nanog mailing list archives

Re: RIPE our of IPv4


From: "Valdis Klētnieks" <valdis.kletnieks () vt edu>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 16:47:37 -0500

On Tue, 26 Nov 2019 06:46:52 +1100, Mark Andrews said:
On 26 Nov 2019, at 03:53, Dmitry Sherman <dmitry () interhost net> wrote:

 I believe it’s Eyeball network’s matter to free IPv4 blocks and move to v6.

It requires both sides to move to IPv6.  Why should the cost of maintaining
working networks be borne alone by the eyeball networks?   That is what is
mostly happening today with CGN.

I believe that Dmitry's point is that we will still require IPv4 addresses for new
organizations deploying dual-stack, and eyeball networks can more easily
move a /16 or even bigger to mostly IPv6 and a small CGNAT address space
than content providers can free up IPv4 addresses during the time that dual
stack is still needed.

Attachment: _bin
Description:


Current thread: