[AusNOG] Telstra run out of IPv4 - goes CGNAT

[Mark ZZZ Smith]

      From: Jonathan Thorpe <jthorpe at Conexim.com.au>
 To: AusNOG Mailing List <ausnog at ausnog.net> 
 Sent: Tuesday, 24 March 2015, 15:01
 Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Telstra run out of IPv4 - goes CGNAT
   
#yiv3344905486 #yiv3344905486 -- _filtered #yiv3344905486 {panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;} _filtered #yiv3344905486 {font-family:Calibri;panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}#yiv3344905486 #yiv3344905486 p.yiv3344905486MsoNormal, #yiv3344905486 li.yiv3344905486MsoNormal, #yiv3344905486 div.yiv3344905486MsoNormal {margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:12.0pt;}#yiv3344905486 a:link, #yiv3344905486 span.yiv3344905486MsoHyperlink {color:blue;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv3344905486 a:visited, #yiv3344905486 span.yiv3344905486MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:purple;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv3344905486 p {margin-right:0cm;margin-left:0cm;font-size:12.0pt;}#yiv3344905486 span.yiv3344905486EmailStyle18 {color:#1F497D;}#yiv3344905486 .yiv3344905486MsoChpDefault {} _filtered #yiv3344905486 {margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}#yiv3344905486 div.yiv3344905486WordSection1 {}#yiv3344905486 Hi All,    It’s disappointing that ISPs still show no sign of delivering IPv6 to consumers, even on an opt-in basis despite scrambling to deploy CGN.   / IPv6 is not an alternative to CGN anymore, it is now too late for that. Unless you're lucky enough to be sitting on enough IPv4 address space that you'll be able to keep handing out unique addresses to customers until IPv6 is literally ubiquitous (meaning IPv4 isn't necessary at all), deployment of CGN or some other form of IPv4 address sharing to residential customers is inevitable.
/ The fundamental question to ask is what problem is IPv6 going to solve better than IPv4, and who will benefit from solving that problem?
/ In the residential space there is no demand from residential users because IPv4 is currently providing them with access to everything they want to access.
/ At some point it is likely that the cost of operating CGNs will be high enough that it will create an incentive at ISPs to deploy IPv6 to their residential customers. The problem IPv6 will then be solving is that using IPv6 to carry the traffic is cheaper than equivalent capacity on  the IPv4 CGN. (This benefit has been available for a while, as Youtube videos are delivered over IPv6 if it is available. Today that benefit became greater as Netflix is also being delivered  over IPv6 if available (in both cases to a Chromecast). The deployment of IPv6 at Internode would already be reducing the CGN throughput and NAT translation packet per second capacity Internode need to buy.)
/ The place where I think IPv6 is going to solve a more immediate need is the "Internet of Things", in particular green field deployments of IoT devices that previously haven't been Internet connected. The benefit is both the large amount of and globally unique addressing that IPv6 provides (even if the IoT devices are addressed using IPv6 ULAs). There would be no entrenched legacy IPv4 infrastructure, applications and operational thinking that creates a strong incentive to stay with IPv4.
/ I've thought for a long time that deploying IPv6 in traditional IPv4 networks is a form of insurance against the day that you need IPv6 for some reason or other (perhaps to access your deployed IoT devices) but then would have a multi-month lead time to deploy it.  A too soon deployment of IPv6 is a much better problem to have than a too late deployment of IPv6.

 One has to wonder if Internode had been bought out before deploying IPv6, if we’d have any consumer ISPs providing IPv6 at all?    Given that CGN requires some re-architecture of the network to work, it would be nice to see as much effort going into deploying dual-stack at the same time.   / Some people change things when they want to, other people only change things when they have to. The cost of deploying CGN might finally be a concrete demonstration as to why not deploying IPv6 in the past was a missed opportunity, even though deploying CGN has been inevitable for quite a long time now.
 Aside from increased support from theoretical CPE incompatibilities if its turned on, what are some of the challenges stopping people deploying IPv6 at the same time as doing CGN?
/ Most likely time and lack of apparent and direct business benefit. Right now, IPv6 isn't going to save you money or make you money. It has the potential to once you put in a CGN.    Kind Regards, Jonathan    

From: AusNOG [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net]On Behalf Of Skeeve Stevens
Sent: Tuesday, 24 March 2015 12:47 AM
To: AusNOG Mailing List
Subject: [AusNOG] Telstra run out of IPv4 - goes CGNAT    Hi all,    I am surprised no one talked about this yesterday    http://www.itnews.com.au/News/401918,telstra-runs-out-of-ipv4-addresses.aspx    This is something I have been saying will happen for a long time now, but forgetting about the Data Retention issue and talking about the CGNAT one, I would be interested to see how many ISPs in Australia are running CGNAT and if they would share their experiences with the rest of us.    Does anyone think this large scale rollout of CGNAT will have a backlash from users? or will no one even notice?    I know of a couple of ISPs running the A10 vThunder CGN boxes, and I am indeed running them on a few ISPs... and for small ISPs they are excellent.  Good price, great performance, easy to manage.  We've also not had a single customer ever complain about things not working.    I'd be interested also to hear of other vendor solutions being deployed out there, how they are working and deal with the common problems, how they scale and most importantly (for me) is the price point and are they appropriate for small (sub 10k) ISPs.
 
...Skeeve 
-- Skeeve Stevens - The ISP Guy Email: skeeve at theispguy.com ; Twitter: @TheISPGuy Blog: TheISPGuy.com ; Facebook: TheISPGuy Linkedin: /in/skeeve ; Expert360: Profile 
_______________________________________________
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/20150324/25204f4c/attachment.html>