|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: [arin-announce] IPv4 Address Space (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Andy Dills wrote: | On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 [email protected] wrote: | | |>The bottom line is that there are three different models |>which may predict when we run out of IPv4 addresses. The |>models predict dates ranging from 2022 to 2045. None of |>the models predict an exact year, they all predict a range |>of 4 to 8 years and the above dates are the earliest and |>latest of those ranges. | | | Ok, so let's assume 2022, for the sake of argument. That is, after all, | nearly 20 years from now. | | |>>Does anybody honestly think companies will commit the capex needed to |>>implement IPv6? |> |>Yes, because IPv6 is merely and incremental improvement, not a grand |>elegant solution to world hunger like ATM. Look at how we managed the |>incremental step of adding MPLS to our IPv4 networks. It was fairly |>painless because it uses the same boxes, the same people and the same |>management systems. And over time, the pain of doing MPLS is reduced |>because the bugs get worked out. | | | Yes, but did MPLS require different ASICs? | | |>Similarly, IPv6 is an incremental change that uses the same boxes, |>people and management systems. | | | People need training (but not all that much), management systems need | rewritten (not majorly), and boxes need hardware replacements to forward | at line rate (CAPEX ALERT). | | |>In fact, if you've put MPLS into your core, you only need to worry about |>IPv6 at the edge from the PE router to the CE router because you can use |>6PE. The capex is being spent anyway by upgrading boxes to meet capacity |>needs. You didn't notice it but the new core boxes are all capable of |>IPv6 with a simple software feature upgrade. | | | Yes, but there will always be this issue of billions of dollars of | exisiting, perfectly functional, unable-to-forward-v6-at-linerate routing | gear. If you have a router completely filled with attached customers, why | would you upgrade that router? You would buy another one for future new | customers, but not upgrade the existing one. The new one might forward | IPv6 at linerate, but the old one still doesn't, and there is still not | sufficient motivation to upgrade that old router. | | |>NANOG rarely takes the lead in new product development and driving |>market demand. Someone else will sort out that problem. | | | Yes, but the growing consensus among network operators is that IPv6 is a | waste of time and money, a technology that solved a problem that no longer | exists. | | If we won't sign off on it, these "other people" won't even have a chance | to. | | |>I know that I said IPv6 is an incremental change, but the world that it |>enables is not incremental. Imagine 30 years from now where the majority |>of people in the developed world have full two-way voice, video, and |>data communications capability seamlessly integrated into their |>clothing, their vehicles, their workplace cubicles and their homes. X10 |>is obsolete replaced by IPv6 over power networks and IPv6 over Bluetooth |>v.3. Networks are everywhere and it is common for even small devices to |>have multiple IPv6 addresses. My belt (containing the cellphone |>transceiver) will have 20 IPv6 addresses in 20 different subnets |>corresponding to 20 VPNs. If you know about today's SIP networks, it's |>like having a phone number in INOC-DBA, FWD, SIPPhone, IAXtel etc. |>Except that these will be IPv6 addresses because they aren't for voice |>traffic. One of the 20 VPNs will be for a heart-rate monitoring service |>that coordinates with my gym and my personal trainer. Another one might |>be for an insulin level monitor that connects to my physician and |>pharmacy. The pharmacist will know when the insulin pack in my shirt |>collar will be depleted and will dispatch a refill to my home |>automatically. | | | Like I said, I don't think people will be all that excited about their | heart-monitor being reachable with a globally routed IP. People only want | to be connected to a certain degree. | | Hell, there are people JUST NOW getting cell phones, and even more people | who will never get them. Most people aren't interested in being | "reachable" 24/7. Even more people aren't interested in having critical | functions rely on technical mumbo-jumbo when they have grown up taking | care of themselves just fine. | | I think you're WAY overestimating our culture's thirst for technology. | As a society, we're still coming to grips with DVDs, MP3s, and cell | phones. | While this may be NANOG, that's a pretty U.S.-centric point of view. The appetite for technology and connectivity in Asian countries is mind-boggling. If just 50% of the college students in China had IP enabled cell phones, that would be 160 million users. I don't know if most U.S. providers have requirements on that kind of scale. - -- ========= bep -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (MingW32) iD8DBQE/nrZQE1XcgMgrtyYRAmDIAJ9fRT/7jbAHE9LSL+Ot8NlbAuiv+ACg1/hP dc7ob/VJ8u3dTzRDOBtsNRY= =/7VW -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|