Mel -
If you do so, you can include one slide near the front that includes –
“What didn’t Happen - RFC 5211”
<chuckle>
:-)
/John
> On Apr 1, 2025, at 8:34 PM, Mel Beckman via NANOG <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> I can see it’s time to present a NANOG talk “How IPv6 saved the Internet”
>
> I’m just going to turn this thread into slides. The talk writes itself!
>
> -mel via cell
>
>> On Apr 1, 2025, at 5:03 PM, Mark Andrews via NANOG <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Single IPv6 stack in the home is achievable today. Single IPv6 stack in the
>> enterprise is achievable today. Single IPv6 stack in the access network is
>> achievable today. This is how most phones work today. The node if it needs
>> to talk to an IPv4 server uses one of the forms of IPv4AAS. Most probably
>> 464XLAT. There are billions of devices that do that today.
>>
>> Today if you attend conferences your IPv4 address is most probably 192.0.0.1
>> if they support IPv6-mostly (IPv4 option 108) and you have an up to date OS.
>>
>> Enabling IPv6-mostly on the access network will allow your IPv4 lease load to
>> drop as CPE start to support it.
>>
>> The hard part will be turning down the IPv4 connections to your peers when
>> the
>> rest of the world has switched to IPv6.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>> On 2 Apr 2025, at 10:05, Alex Buie via NANOG <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> At the risk of oversimplifying:
>>>
>>> “just because you can divide 8 apples between 2 people with long division
>>> on paper, it’s a heck of a lot easier just to count off if you can get away
>>> with it”
>>>
>>>
>>> But this raises an interesting question; is there ever an actual end? What
>>> does IPv6 adoption completion look like? Is there a definition of success?
>>> You can almost certainly not buy a physical GP computer today at least that
>>> does not support static IPv6 addressing in some manner, at least in terms
>>> of network elements. And I could get IPv6 connectivity at nearly any
>>> address in the US, (where I have experience) if I’m willing to pay enough
>>> money for it. what else is there? Is IPv6 only considered successful with
>>> IPv4 is truly turned off? There’s always gonna be people who want 32 bits
>>> instead of 128 because it’s easier to carry around in your brain and doubly
>>> so if you don’t even need the rest of those bits for what you’re trying to
>>> do.
>>>
>>> The allure of only having to set up a single protocol stack is very strong,
>>> but I just don’t see it happening in my lifetime in a “production”
>>> capacity.
>>>
>>> You’re always gonna at least need some broker box somewhere with your last
>>> /29 talking to the vestiges of the companies still running exchange 2003.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NANOG mailing list
>>> https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/MDVNX6WMAJV47OIIGGPYLZMCAHKPYBDE/
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mark Andrews, ISC
>> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
>> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: [email protected]
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NANOG mailing list
>> https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/7BQSH35WPUEKTSRFOJIRGFYABWLM6IMS/
> _______________________________________________
> NANOG mailing list
> https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/DZS2DESH7DZ7H6VZIQRU6HYLDSKUXPJA/
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/ADAJ3RC6LTDXOW5OJ756QC4WIU36FLLL/
