>> On Nov 29, 2019, at 5:28 PM, Mike Hammett <na...@ics-il.net> wrote: > > "So if they do care about IPv6 connectivity, they haven’t communicated that > to us." > > Nor will they, but that doesn't mean IPv6 isn't important.
Personally, I don’t disagree. We engineers do what we can to support IPv6: We build it into our tooling and switch it on in our gear. Our network is dual stack v4/v6 and has been for quite a while. But with other tools we don’t control, and particularly in terms of business process, we have a ways to go, and it’s not a priority. I want IPv6 to succeed, really. But the global end game picture looks more and more bleak to me. > > Frankly, I'm surprised anti-IPv6 people still have employment. > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > Midwest-IX > http://www.midwest-ix.com -Brian > > From: "Brian Knight" <m...@knight-networks.com> > To: "Mark Andrews" <ma...@isc.org> > Cc: "nanog" <firstname.lastname@example.org> > Sent: Friday, November 29, 2019 10:29:17 AM > Subject: Re: RIPE our of IPv4 > > > > On Nov 27, 2019, at 4:04 PM, Mark Andrews <ma...@isc.org> wrote: > > > > > > > >> On 28 Nov 2019, at 06:08, Brian Knight <m...@knight-networks.com> wrote: > >> > >>> On 2019-11-26 17:11, Ca By wrote: > >>> On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 12:15 AM Sabri Berisha <sa...@cluecentral.net> > >>> wrote: > >>>> ----- On Nov 26, 2019, at 1:36 AM, Doug Barton do...@dougbarton.us wrote: > >> > >> [snip] > >>>> there is no ROI at this point. In this kind of environment there needs to > >>>> be a strong case to invest the capex to support IPv6. > >>>> IPv6 must be supported on the CxO level in order to be deployed. > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Sabri, (Badum tsss) MBA > >>> I see....well let me translate it you MBA-eese for you: > >>> FANG deployed ipv6 nearly 10 years ago. Since deploying ipv6, the cohort > >>> experienced 300% CAGR. Also, everything is mobile, and all mobile > >>> providers > >>> in the usa offer ipv6 by default in most cases. Latency! Scale! As your > >>> company launches its digital transformation iot 2020 virtualization > >>> container initiatives, ipv6 will be an integral part of staying relevant > >>> on > >>> the blockchain. Also, FANG did it nearly 10 years ago. Big content and > >>> big eyeballs are on ipv6, ipv4 is a winnowing longtail of irrelevance and > >>> iot botnets. > >> > >> None of which matters a damn to almost all of my business eyeball > >> customers. They can still get from our network to 100% of all Internet > >> content & services via IPv4 in 2019. > > > > No you can’t. You can’t reach the machine I’m typing on via IPv4 and it is > > ON THE INTERNET. It is directly reachable via IPv6. Selling Internet > > connectivity without IPv6 should be considered fraud these days. Don’t > > you believe in “Truth in Advertising”? > > I had meant to write “They can still get from our network to 100% of all > Internet content and services that matter to them [our customers] via IPv4...” > > 0% of my IPv4-only customers have opened tickets saying they cannot reach > some service that is only IPv6 accessible. So if they do care about IPv6 > connectivity, they haven’t communicated that to us. > > > Mark Andrews, ISC > > 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia > > PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org > > > > Thanks, > > -Brian