But when something works with IPv4, we shouldn't expect that the user
experience is reduced when moving to IPv6.

Shane

On Tue, Jun 23, 2026 at 11:28 AM Tom Beecher via NANOG <
[email protected]> wrote:

> >
> > BUT: we can't expect everyone who wants to connect to the Internet to
> have
> > that level of competence.
> > If someone's a graphic designer working from home, and they want
> > resiliency with 2x ISPs, I don't think we can expect them to have (or be
> > able to afford) the level of competency required to run BGP with 2 ISPs.
> >
>
> This is just the standard complexity vs cost question.
>
> If someone wants 2 upstreams , that's easy. If they expect it to function a
> certain way, that may require more complexity that has to be paid for. ( in
> equipment or expertise.)  Or they can just swap cables and reboot
> something once in a while, and find that acceptable.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2026 at 1:56 PM Arie Vayner <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I think I see a misalignment with reality:
> >
> > > Simple BGP config is not that demanding. If you're going to connect a
> > > device to the public internet with BGP, it should require a basic level
> > of
> > > competence.
> >
> > Yes, anyone using "BGP to connect to the Internet" is required to have
> > some level of competence, agreed.
> >
> > BUT: we can't expect everyone who wants to connect to the Internet to
> have
> > that level of competence.
> > If someone's a graphic designer working from home, and they want
> > resiliency with 2x ISPs, I don't think we can expect them to have (or be
> > able to afford) the level of competency required to run BGP with 2 ISPs.
> >
> > Instead, I think a more realistic approach would be for them to go to
> > their closest electronics retailer, buy a fancy "dual ISP" router, then
> > just order 2 ISP services from whatever's available in their region, plug
> > in, and forget about it.
> >
> > Unfortunately, getting things like NPTv6, or anything that the IPv6
> > standards/BCPs state today will really work with IPv6 for the above
> setup,
> > and the end result will be that they will stay on IPv4, with a 2xWAN NAT
> > setup.
> > From my recent experience with 2 large ISPs providing services in my
> area,
> > their IPv6 setups would not have worked together with NPTv6 (different
> pool
> > sizes, one of them only supporting a single /64 and the other one
> requiring
> > deep tweaking to get anything more than a /64 to work)
> >
> > Tnx
> > Arie
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 22, 2026 at 5:19 AM Tom Beecher via NANOG <
> > [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> >
> >> > Is there any current effort underway to make BGP more accessible,
> >> > user-friendly, or "plug and play?" Anything that might address some of
> >> > the more technically demanding aspects of multihoming?
> >>
> >>
> >> Simple BGP config is not that demanding. If you're going to connect a
> >> device to the public internet with BGP, it should require a basic level
> of
> >> competence.
> >>
> >> CPE vendors might set up web pages that request IPs and an ASN for you.
> >> > Sets up ROAs, IRR, and the CPE, start to finish.
> >>
> >>
> >> None of this stuff should be 'ez-mode' for the uninformed user.  Heck,
> >> informed users make a mess of it a lot of the time.
> >>
> >> Home install kits and plug and play doesn't work at a certain point.
> Stop
> >> trying to shoehorn it.
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jun 21, 2026 at 11:23 PM Brian Knight via NANOG <
> >> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Is there any current effort underway to make BGP more accessible,
> >> > user-friendly, or "plug and play?" Anything that might address some of
> >> > the more technically demanding aspects of multihoming?
> >> >
> >> > Quick Google says no, but maybe someone has more awareness.
> >> >
> >> > I'm pipe-dreaming BGP multihoming becoming as simple as connecting two
> >> > Internet links to a CPE, with no reduction in MTU. No SD-WAN, no
> >> > tunnels, no NAT. Works over any kind of link: 5G, wifi, GPON, cable,
> >> > fiber, carrier pigeon.
> >> >
> >> > CPE vendors might set up web pages that request IPs and an ASN for
> you.
> >> > Sets up ROAs, IRR, and the CPE, start to finish.
> >> >
> >> > Maybe there's a new protocol where the carrier auto-generates a BGP
> >> > multihoming token and sends it to the user in the order docs. User
> sets
> >> > the token on the CPE interface facing that provider. Successful
> >> > negotiation lets the customer announce their prefix and ASN. CPE and
> >> > carrier manage it all, no network staff needed.
> >> >
> >> > -Brian
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 2026-06-21 19:29, Dorn Hetzel via NANOG wrote:
> >> > > Sure, have every hotdog cart run BGP, pretty soon we'll need 64 bit
> AS
> >> > > numbers :)
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On Sun, Jun 21, 2026 at 6:29 PM Mike Hammett via NANOG <
> >> > > [email protected]> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> Most pizza shops aren't going to be able to manage BGP.
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >> -----
> >> > >> Mike Hammett
> >> > >> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Midwest Internet Exchange
> >> > >>
> >> > >> The Brothers WISP
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > NANOG mailing list
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/7AMX6YN4MRTN7UQ5CQFNYI3KJCKKFJMZ/
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> NANOG mailing list
> >>
> >>
> https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/MIC6KX6AZKYZ5OWF4YBPG6754POTGOEI/
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> NANOG mailing list
>
> https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/7AJTPSWZIS37HTGF5KOLTVBZ4XK7SPUK/
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/4WX55UBLCC5ZR6IWZ6JAMHM25DAHN75Y/

Reply via email to