[AusNOG] IPv6

[Mark Andrews]

In message <CAOu9xNJbkKhU3DbTjmX1LG5hcpx+uS-6XxOjajd3rS=wHEurFg at mail.gmail.com>, Robert Hudson writes:
>
> Right now, it seems that some ISPs/carriers are deciding to invest in
> NAT/PAT (or CGN, if that's really a thing) rather than IPv6.  Why?  I'd
> have to suggest cheaper than a full IPv6 implementation (and given that
> they'd have to be giving IPv4 IP addresses alongside IPv6 addresses
> anyway), it's been selected by many as the path of least resistance.  ISPs
> who do offer IPv6 (the few of them there are at present) still have to
> offer IPv4 addresses to their customers anyway - I believe we've all agreed
> that at this stage, an IPv6-only Internet connection won't work as
> customers would require.

No, its been selected because ISPs as a whole have procastinated
about delivering IPv6 to their customers until it was to late to
skip doing something like CGN.  You are still procastinating and
digging youselves a bigger hole by doing so.

The first IPv6 packets between different implementation were
transmitted over 20 years ago now.  A lot of you have been asleep
at that keyboard with respect to IPv6 for most of that time.

I've had a IPv6 tunnel for more than half of that time waiting for
my home ISP to deliver IPv6 natively.  Its now terminated in a
NetGear box running CeroWRT (a OpenWRT variant).  The native image
of that box is a older version of OpenWRT.

It's hard to develop products from home that support IPv6 without
having a IPv6 connection to the world.

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