On 3/12/19 00:12, Mark Andrews wrote: > > >> On 3 Dec 2019, at 13:31, Valdis Klētnieks <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Mon, 02 Dec 2019 11:04:24 -0800, Fred Baker said: >> >>>> I believe that Dmitry's point is that we will still require IPv4 addresses >>>> for new >>>> organizations deploying dual-stack >>> >>> I think I understood what you meant, but not what you said. >> >>> If someone is dual stack, they are IPv6-capable and IPv4-capable. >> >> And they're going to need v4 addresses to be v4-capable, aren't there? >> >> A new corporation that's trying to spin up dual-stack is going to need 2 >> address allocations, a v4 and a v6. > > Why does a new organisation need to have any global IPv4 addresses of their > own > at all? In most cases they don’t. It’s only inertia that is causing people > to > want to have their own global IPv4 addresses. > > We have IPv4 as a service which gives on demand shared IPv4 addresses. > Millions > of people reach the IPv4 Internet every day using IPv4AAS. > CDNs are dual stack and provide the IPv4 presence on the net. These days > these > are shared addresses. > VPNs run over IPv6 and they can in turn run over IPv6 in IPv4 tunnels when > the remote doesn’t support native IPv6. Its just another level on > encapsulation. > Email is often out sourced so you don’t need your own IPv4 addresses for that. > Then there is in the cloud for other services, again you don’t need your own > IPv4 > addresses.
Wwll, yeah.. you don't need IPv4 addresses if you are going to be using somebody else's networks and services. Not that you should, though.... -- Fernando Gont SI6 Networks e-mail: [email protected] PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
