[AusNOG] IPv4

[Joshua D'Alton]

Sorry, thought I read that your main site didn't support it, I took that to
mean nothing else did either, but perhaps thats just a small issue with
your www server?

Joel, yea fair points, but offering dual stack is part of the problem. If
sites can still be accessed via v4, why indeed should Telstra care about v6?

I don't know what members are missing what points, but the OP was about v4
costing less, and someone stipulated this was A Bad Thing (tm), yet not
really any suggestions on how to get people like Telstra to be v6 compliant.

Maybe next IPv6 day you could all turn off your v4 network and leave it off
until Telstra gets the point from its flooded helpdesk.

On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Jared Hirst <
jared.hirst at serversaustralia.com.au> wrote:

> Joshua,
>
>
>
> We FULLY support v6… where did you get that we don’t? Sign up right now
> for a Virtual Server and you will AUTO be allocated a v6 address that works
> with our carriers. So your statement is not relevant at all in comparing us
> to BP. We charge a lot less and still manage to support it with no issues,
> your missing the point I think. I support it, you can get a VDS / dedi /
> DSL from us with V6, however no carrier in Aus will support it natively for
> the consumer? I don’t see Bigpond / Optus / iinet offering as a standard
> offering like we do.
>
>
>
> *From:* ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net [mailto:
> ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] *On Behalf Of *Joshua D'Alton
> *Sent:* Sunday, March 03, 2013 1:15 PM
>
> *To:* AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> *Subject:* Re: [AusNOG] IPv4
>
>
>
> Size of the business doesn't really matter, its the margins that matter.
> You look at someone like Bulletproof, and while they probably don't do much
> more traffic than say serversaustralia, I'd bet they charge about 5x as
> much. And they support IPv6 AFAIK.
>
>
>
> @Peter, yea but there is only no benefit because the content providers
> like serversaustralia don't support it. Obviously it isn't limited to just
> Australia, most of serversaustralia sized businesses globally don't support
> IPv6, but imagine if they did.
>
>
>
> @Ross, might or might not make sense, but reality is reality. It isn't so
> much about them footing the bill for everyone else to change, it is about
> them being competitive in the market. If there is a business, 2yrs or 20
> years old, that is facing growth issues due to lack of IP space, then it is
> up to them to decide how they want to remain competitive. They could moan
> and groan about IPv4 prices coming down and the fact they can't get any
> more, or they could move to ipv6 where the potentially large upgrade cost
> becomes merely nominal if they look 20 years ahead.
>
>
>
> All these arguments seem to mirror the ones the copyright groups use.
> Somehow it is the rest of the worlds duty to keep their old dying business
> model alive.
>
> On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Zone Networks - Joel <
> joel at zonenetworks.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> So what you are basically saying ..
>
>
>
> Small business cant afford to move to ipv6
>
> Large business can afford to move to ipv6 but couldnt give a damn..
>
>
>
> That is brilliant… so Aus has <1% ipv6 traffic and that is cause of all
> the small business not running ipv6
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net [mailto:
> ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] *On Behalf Of *Joshua D'Alton
> *Sent:* Sunday, 3 March 2013 12:34 PM
> *To:* AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> *Subject:* Re: [AusNOG] IPv4
>
>
>
> No one forced them into business. No one made them go for lower margins
> that would mean they aren't/weren't IPv6 ready.
>
>
>
> If they decided to hop onto the sinking ship without a lifevest, its their
> own damn fault. If they went into business with software like cPanel and
> did nothing to try push for proper IPv6 support, again that is their own
> fault. Bigpond and Optus have very little reason from content serving
> perspective to have IPv6, so it was up to the major sources of content to
> get their side ready so that people like Bigpond and Optus actually had
> benefit in rolling out IPv6. Do you think David Thodey is going to go to
> his board and say "oh hey guys, here's a $100 million proposal to ready our
> network for IPv6, of course it won't benefit anyone as none of the content
> out there is IPv6, but it will cost us more if we have to do it later" and
> get an answer anything other than "bugger off, not interested, it might
> cost us more later but all we care about is this years bottom line, screw
> the future that is the next CEOs problem"?
>
>
>
> Maybe instead of looking at it like the world is shafting these smaller
> businesses, maybe look at it like the world has given them a free ride all
> this time, and now it is time for them to step up. And if that means their
> business folds, well that means more customers for businesses that WILL
> survive and manage to implement IPv6 before the 22nd century.
>
>
>
> I gotta tell you though, over the past year or so there have been some
> fairly massive players on the global stage that have all started charging a
> lot more for IPv4, and aside from a few complaints from businesses being
> run out of India or Malaysia or somewhere where low margins work really
> well, the majority of customers have understood the reality of the cost of
> IPv4. And none of them have left the providers, because while the IPv4 cost
> increased, overall these lowish margin providers are still a damn sight
> cheaper than the majority of companies.
>
> On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Peter Betyounan <
> peter at serversaustralia.com.au> wrote:
>
> So basically any new businesses that are 1/4 of that age are
> collateral damage in this mess , great view.
>
> There is no force behind change then software providers like Cpanel
> who would hold half the worlds content would move faster on forward
> planning on ipv6. Big providers are at fault as it has been said no
> residential move has been made by the likes of bigpond and Optus so
> take up has been short of nil by market as no substantial end users
> have ipv6.
>
> Laying the blame on small providers is plain wrong.
>
> Regards
> Peter Betyounan
> www.serversaustralia.com.au
>
>
>
> On 03/03/2013, at 7:06 AM, Mark Smith <markzzzsmith at yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> >
> >> ________________________________
> >> From: Peter Betyounan <peter at serversaustralia.com.au>
> >> To: Jared Hirst <jared.hirst at serversaustralia.com.au>
> >> Cc: "ausnog at lists.ausnog.net" <ausnog at lists.ausnog.net>
> >> Sent: Saturday, 2 March 2013 7:16 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] IPv4
> >>
> >>
> >> As I have always thought without forceful intervention by the governing
> bodies change will not come, financial incentives/penalties will be the key
> to this and until all big business can feel this change will not come why
> would it when they can CGNAT / buy more IP's / etc etc . The issue here is
> small to medium business who do not have the funds to buy more IP's will
> eventually die automatically monopolizing the market by leaving the big
> players which sucks for competition..../end rant.
> >
> > It won't specifically be IPv6 or running out of IPv4 addresses that will
> have caused these businesses to fail. What those businesses will have
> really done is failed to plan ahead. In this instance, they've had 10 to 15
> years to prepare and plan, and to incorporate the costs of the future
> upgrade into their current product prices. In most other instances e.g. a
> new tax, they'll have less than 12 months to prepare for it. A business
> that can't plan ahead with a 10 to 15 year notification period probably
> shouldn't deserve to survive, because it also probably doing a lot of other
> things wrong too, and has such slim margins that it doesn't have any
> ability to cope with the reasonable yet unexpected cost increases. Would
> they survive if power prices go up by 20%?
> >
> > This sounds harsh, but it is the reality. Businesses that aren't good at
> being a business fail, and the resources they weren't utilising very well
> (e.g. people, infrastructure), are absorbed into businesses that are better
> at being businesses.
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20130303/cf07059b/attachment.html>