nanog mailing list archives
Re: RIPE our of IPv4
From: Ca By <cb.list6 () gmail com>
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2019 08:45:09 -0800
On Sat, Nov 30, 2019 at 8:06 AM Brian Knight <ml () knight-networks com> wrote:
On Nov 29, 2019, at 5:28 PM, Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net> wrote: "So if they do care about IPv6 connectivity, they haven’t communicated that to us." Nor will they, but that doesn't mean IPv6 isn't important. Personally, I don’t disagree. We engineers do what we can to support IPv6: We build it into our tooling and switch it on in our gear. Our network is dual stack v4/v6 and has been for quite a while. But with other tools we don’t control, and particularly in terms of business process, we have a ways to go, and it’s not a priority. I want IPv6 to succeed, really. But the global end game picture looks more and more bleak to me.
I can see how your situation is bleak That said, google see nearly 40% of their traffic on ipv6 in the usa , growth trend looks strong https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html And Comcast (71%), Charter (52%), VZ (85%), ATT (60 and 78%) , and T-Mobile (95%) have the majority of their subs on ipv6 https://www.worldipv6launch.org/measurements/ Sadly, ipv6 is creating a bifurcation of the internet. Scale shops have v6, and non-scale shops don’t. The big players are pulling away, and that makes things bleak for the folks just trying to tread water in ipv4.
Frankly, I'm surprised anti-IPv6 people still have employment. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com -Brian ------------------------------ *From: *"Brian Knight" <ml () knight-networks com> *To: *"Mark Andrews" <marka () isc org> *Cc: *"nanog" <nanog () nanog org> *Sent: *Friday, November 29, 2019 10:29:17 AM *Subject: *Re: RIPE our of IPv4On Nov 27, 2019, at 4:04 PM, Mark Andrews <marka () isc org> wrote: On 28 Nov 2019, at 06:08, Brian Knight <ml () knight-networks com> wrote:On 2019-11-26 17:11, Ca By wrote: On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 12:15 AM Sabri Berisha <sabri () cluecentral net> wrote:----- On Nov 26, 2019, at 1:36 AM, Doug Barton dougb () dougbarton uswrote:[snip]there is no ROI at this point. In this kind of environment thereneeds tobe a strong case to invest the capex to support IPv6. IPv6 must be supported on the CxO level in order to be deployed. Thanks, Sabri, (Badum tsss) MBAI see....well let me translate it you MBA-eese for you: FANG deployed ipv6 nearly 10 years ago. Since deploying ipv6, thecohortexperienced 300% CAGR. Also, everything is mobile, and all mobileprovidersin the usa offer ipv6 by default in most cases. Latency! Scale! As your company launches its digital transformation iot 2020 virtualization container initiatives, ipv6 will be an integral part of stayingrelevant onthe blockchain. Also, FANG did it nearly 10 years ago. Big contentandbig eyeballs are on ipv6, ipv4 is a winnowing longtail of irrelevanceandiot botnets.None of which matters a damn to almost all of my business eyeballcustomers. They can still get from our network to 100% of all Internet content & services via IPv4 in 2019.No you can’t. You can’t reach the machine I’m typing on via IPv4 and itis ON THE INTERNET. It is directly reachable via IPv6. Selling Internet connectivity without IPv6 should be considered fraud these days. Don’tyou believe in “Truth in Advertising”?I had meant to write “They can still get from our network to 100% of all Internet content and services that matter to them [our customers] via IPv4...” 0% of my IPv4-only customers have opened tickets saying they cannot reach some service that is only IPv6 accessible. So if they do care about IPv6 connectivity, they haven’t communicated that to us.Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW<https://www.google.com/maps/search/1+Seymour+St.,+Dundas+Valley,+NSW?entry=gmail&source=g> 2117, AustraliaPHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka () isc orgThanks, -Brian
Current thread:
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4, (continued)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Brian Knight (Nov 27)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Brandon Butterworth (Nov 27)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Brian Knight (Nov 27)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Baldur Norddahl (Nov 27)
- RE: RIPE our of IPv4 Michel Py (Nov 27)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Mark Andrews (Nov 27)
- RE: RIPE our of IPv4 Michel Py (Nov 27)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Brian Knight (Nov 29)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Mike Hammett (Nov 29)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Brian Knight (Nov 30)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Ca By (Nov 30)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Justin Streiner (Nov 30)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Matthew Kaufman (Nov 30)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Filip Hruska (Nov 30)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Matthew Kaufman (Nov 30)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Brandon Martin (Nov 30)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Matthew Kaufman (Nov 30)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Brandon Martin (Nov 30)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Brandon Martin (Nov 29)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Valdis Klētnieks (Nov 29)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Mark Milhollan (Nov 26)