In message <CAL9jLaYXCdfViHbUPx-=rs4vsx5mfecpfue8b7vq+au2hcx...@mail.gmail.com> , Christopher Morrow writes: > So... I don't really see any of the above arguments for v6 in a vm > setup to really hold water in the short term at least. I think for > sure you'll want v6 for public services 'soon' (arguably like 10 yrs > ago so you'd get practice and operational experience and ...) but for > the rest sure it's 'nice', and 'cute', but really not required for > operations (unless you have v6 only customers)
Everyone has effectively IPv6-only customers today. IPv6 native + CGN only works for services. Similarly DS-Lite and 464XLAT. Sometimes you can get away w/o IPv6, sometimes you can't. In all cases IPv4 is getting more and more expensive to support as more customers share public IP addresses even if it is just have to re-tune rate limits to account for the sharing. Mark -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org