[AusNOG] IPocalypse eve?

[Mark Andrews]

In message <C96C4B25.97A4%damien at yahoo-inc.com>, Damien Morris writes:
> On 31/01/11 8:51 AM, "Mark Smith"
> <nanog at 85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org> wrote:
> 
> >http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/
> >
> >"Projected IANA Unallocated Address Pool Exhaustion: 01-Feb-2011"
> >
> 
> The amount of arguments still taking place on nanog about v6 is making
> this a bit of a concern.
> 
> e.g: /48s vs /56s vs /64s for consumers, /64s vs /126s for PtP, SLAAC vs
> DHCPv6, ND vs DoS attacks, DNS64/NAT64 vs "it'll never work"..
> 
> Perhaps when it comes to IP it's possible to have too much of a good
> thing? Or have most people worked it out and it's just the vocal minority
> on nanog? :)

I suspect a lot are trying to work out how to actually deploy IPv6
having left it to the last minute.  There really are questions on
nanog from those that are just starting the process and many
(including myself) have opinions on the matter.

6rd with a global 6rd domain will waste +99% of the address space
for most ISP's assuming 100% take up by their customers.  Very few
ISP's have +1% of the globally available IPv4 space.  Just using a
6rd domain per /8 the ISP lives in would get rid of most of that
wastage and allow the ISP to have the choice of giving the customers
a /48 using 6rd rather than being force to a /56.

Mark

> Cheers,
> Damien.
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka at isc.org