> On Sep 23, 2021, at 6:49 PM, Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Sep 23, 2021, at 12:50 , Brian Johnson <brian.john...@netgeek.us> wrote:
>>
>> Side question on this thread…
>>
>> Is it everyones current expectation that if a provider were to switch to
>> IPv6 and drop IPv4 that the customers would all be just fine with that? I
>> believe that there are several applications used by some of the the loudest
>> customers (typically gamers and network gurus), not to mention some business
>> applications that would break or be sub-optimal at best. I see CGN as the
>> band aid to this issue, not the cure to the problem.
>
> Today? no.
>
> At some point when a relatively small number of remaining laggards among
> major content providers move forward? Yes.
So do we just bleed out in the mean time?
>
> Do you really think that those applications/vendors wouldn’t move quickly if
> a couple of major eyeball providers announced “Effective X date”, we’re going
> to start offering a $X/month discount to any customer(s) who are willing to
> stop using IPv4.
I’d be happy to suggest this to my clients, but it’s not a real thing yet.
Plus, the average human (even the average CSR at a small regional provider
network) has no idea what this means.
>
> You an only cover an arterial bleed with a band-aid for so long before it
> becomes silly, septic even. If you’re wondering how quick that point is
> coming up, I suggest you check your mirrors.
Triage suggests that you assist in succession of the current bleeding before
being concerned about the next time you are cut. I have BGN deployments that
have been in place for 4+ years with little customer knowledge. It has allowed
clients to avoid the IPv4 market issues, and in some instances, become a source
for others to help compensate for the initial CGN expense.
I totally agree with you in spirit, but I am working on the problem of now, not
the problem of some point in the future. The cost of CGN is becoming less
expensive than IPv4 space acquisition. I wish this weren’t true.
>
> Owen
>
>>
>> Discuss…?
>>
>> - Brian
>>
>>> On Sep 23, 2021, at 10:46 AM, Owen DeLong via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> There are real issues with dual-stack, as this thread started out with.
>>>> I don't think there is a need neither to invent IPv6 problems, nor to
>>>> promote IPv6 advantages. What we need is a way out of dual-stack-hell.
>>>
>>> I don’t disagree, but a reversion to IPv4-only certainly won’t do it.
>>>
>>> I think the only way out is through. Unfortunately, the IPv6 resistant
>>> forces
>>> are making that hard for everyone else.
>>>
>>> Owen
>>>
>>
>
