North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: cost of dual-stack vs cost of v6-only [Re: IPv6 on SOHO routers?]

  • From: David Conrad
  • Date: Thu Mar 13 12:55:52 2008


On Mar 13, 2008, at 8:42 AM, Jamie Bowden wrote:
MS, Apple, Linux, *BSD are ALL dual stack out of the box currently.

The fact that the kernel may support IPv6 does not mean that IPv6 is actually usable (as events at NANOG, APRICOT, and the IETF have shown). There are lots of bits and pieces that are necessary for mere mortals to actually use IPv6.

The core is IPv6/dual stack capable, even if it's not enabled everywhere,

I'm told by some folks who run core networks for a living that while the routers may sling IPv6 packets as fast or faster than IPv4, doing so with ACLs, filter lists, statistics, monitoring, etc., is lacking. What's worse, the vendors aren't spinning the ASICs (which I'm told have a 2 to 3 year lead time from design to being shipped) necessary to do everything core routers are expected to do for IPv6 yet.

and a large chunk of Asia and Europe are running IPv6 right now.

I keep hearing this, but could you indicate what parts of Asia and Europe are running IPv6 right now? I'm aware, for example, that NTT is using IPv6 for their FLETS service, but that is an internal transport service not connected to the Internet. I'm unaware (but would be very interested in hearing about) any service in Asia or Europe that is seeing significant IPv6 traffic.

The US Govt. is under mandate to transition to v6 by the end of the year.

I thought parts of the USG were under a mandate to be "IPv6 capable" (whatever that means) by this summer. If there is a mandate to be running IPv6 within the USG by the end of the year, people are going to have to get very, very busy very, very quickly.

only bits that are missing right now are the routers and switches at the
edge, and support from transit providers,

My understanding is that there are lots of bits and pieces that are missing in the infrastructure, but that's almost irrelevant. What is _really_ missing is content accessible over IPv6 as it results in the chicken-or-egg problem: without content, few customers will request IPv6. Without customer requests for IPv6, it's hard to make the business case to deploy the infrastructure to support it. Without infrastructure to support IPv6, it's hard to make the business case to deploy content on top of IPv6.

and if they're going to keep
supplying the Fed with gear and connectivity, at least one major player
in those areas of the NA market is going to HAVE to make it happen.

Remember GOSIP?