Totally agree with John here - the sole reason that can has been able to kicked is *because* so many carriers and devices have IPv6 support, and netops are able to leverage them in situations where they fully control both ends of the pipe. 659 million mobile phones in india. Imagine trying to manage the RFC1918 space for that in a pure-IPV4 play. Sheesh. IPv6 also enables really innovative mesh OTT services like https://yggdrasil-network.github.io/ which allow me to build all sorts of semi-local autonomous IPv6 nets around a "human scale" large property.
At the same time, I also 100% agree with Jim that nothing sells newspapers faster than "the sky is falling", sky falling notwithstanding. Alex On Tue, Apr 1, 2025 at 6:03 PM John Curran via NANOG <[email protected]> wrote: > Jim - > > There’s a huge difference between "IPv6 is being deployed” versus “IPv4 is > going away”… > > IPv6 is necessary to solve a problem that most networks simply don’t > have: i.e., how to handle millions of new devices connecting to your > network each and every year with no end in sight. For folks making up the > core of the Internet that experience such problems, IPv6 is pretty much > essential – and its widespread deployment has taken an enormous burden off > requirements that otherwise would have overburdened the IPv4 address space. > > So yes, IPv4 continues to function, but that’s not really “in spite of > IPv6” as “because of IPv6”. There’s no reason that folks running IPv4 > shouldn’t continue to do so unmolested – if the tool serves the purpose, > then that’s perfectly fine – as long as the requirements that you face > don’t change precipitously, you should be able to use IPv4 for all your > needs. (This is particularly the case because the cost burden to > interoperate with IPv4-only devices continues to be borne by the IPv6 > deployers, and that appears to be a reasonably safe assumption for the > foreseeable future.) > > Thanks, > /John > > John Curran > President and CEO > American Registry for Internet Numbers > > > On Apr 1, 2025, at 4:47 PM, Jim Shankland via NANOG <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I'm not a grumpy old man, but I'm going to play one for a minute. > > The case for IPv6 was that the Internet was about to collapse, or at least > stall out, unless everybody switched over from IPv4. I don't remember when > I first heard that claim, but it was definitely in a year that started with > a "1". > > It may be true eventually, too -- who knows, maybe even soon. And yes, > there's been plenty of pain and trouble "behind the curtain" along the way. > But zoom out to the big picture, and things are still working in IPv4 land. > IPv6 will take over (perhaps quickly) once that stops. > > But until then, stickers and loaded language like "modern" and "legacy" > are unlikely to have any effect at all. > > I hope it's clear that I'm not arguing against IPv6. I've just been > watching the "drop dead" date when the transition would be absolutely > forced get pushed back for half my professional career: 30 years of "any > day now". > > Jim Shankland > > > On 3/27/25 10:07 AM, Lucien Hoydic via NANOG wrote: > Add RCN Chicago (Now Astound), to the list of companies that don't support > IPV6. > > I'm not "Astound"ed by their lack of support for modern technology > > > On Wednesday, March 26th, 2025 at 1:00 PM, Andrew Latham via NANOG < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > Today yet another ISP is running Fiber in the utility easement at the > street. I checked and they do not offer IPv6 or have ANY IPv6 peering. > > I have offered the hard to find IPv6 Legacy Warning stickers on my > Redbubble profile. About a month before any meeting or event I see a bulk > order for Amish IPv6 stickers designed by Phil Benchoff and hard to find > post Google+. I have the markup/profit set to the lowest setting and have > made maybe $8 over 5+ years. > > Linky: > > https://www.redbubble.com/i/sticker/Legacy-IP-Warning-by-gringomalvado/38585698.EJUG5 > > Ranting a bit as I have four ISPs boxes at the street and two of them do > not have IPv6 in 2025. Converting my frustration into finding Phil and > sending him some coffee money. > > -- > - Andrew "lathama" Latham - > _______________________________________________ > NANOG mailing list > > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/E36ADONSJ6RWNOBV5JSKGVYZTY7VCS6J/ > _______________________________________________ > NANOG mailing list > > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/C2EYACUPLCEXTSWS54J4DPWBGYQRB6YV/ > _______________________________________________ > NANOG mailing list > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/JODZDERTINSZ5FDS2IPXWFMRMS4H3Z4I/ > > _______________________________________________ > NANOG mailing list > > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/M3UUZLVLR3IA4UXUVYUT2H73CSSCBLGB/ _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/NS5YZGSNGVEF24OHSWV6HSGBORNVZAJV/
