Fred, I thought about posting back to you all day yesterday and finally decided to.
I agree that there will always be some sort of IPV4 out and available. They are constantly trying to get universities who were given huge blocks that have used less than 5% to relinquish parts of it. But as Tom DeReggi has stated that there is other benefits. I am not excited about being a bleeding edge adopter but I am looking forward to more training on this issue and being prepared for when there is a benefit for my clients. The reason I take this stance is I have been in the computer industry for 26 years. I know almost ever DOS command there is and can still write a pretty mean batch file menu system if needed in a pinch. One day my largest client at that time with 100 workstations and the new Novel 2.15 server asked me what I thought about this new Windows 2.86 software. I told him that it was all a fad why would you want to rum more than lotus 123 and WordPerfect. When Windows 3.0 came out I got a copy and started playing with it and I thought I might be wrong. I setup a meeting with that large company and told them I was wrong. They informed me that they already knew that and due to my short sidedness they had just signed a service agreement with another company. I lost a company that I had made $150K off of the previous year. I vowed to never look at future possibilities the same. Y2K was a bust but I made lots of money giving lectures telling people that I had no idea what was going to be happening but that all organizations needed to plan for emergencies and have back plans whether it was Y2K, a fire, an Ice storm, or a tornado. Same goes with IPV6. I am not sure what will happen or if it even will. But I need to have a plan to be ready no matter what comes. The federal government has set a directive to make all their networks IPV6 compliant by next year I believe. So if I want to be able to service their traffic then I have to have it. Steve Barnes RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service -----Original Message----- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Fred Goldstein Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 12:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6? At 1/13/2011 11:59 AM, you wrote: > >>I've got a small network with a MT RB-750 and UBNT (PS2's, NSL2's, > >>NSLM5's, NSM5's and a BulletM2) and I'm wondering how we're going to > >>fair if/when our upstream throws the switch on IPv6. I'd like to > >>hear someone else is already doing it. > >> > >>Our "upstream" apparently is Hughesnet being resold in South > >>America. I'm not sure if their system/our modem is IPv6 > >>capable/ready. That may keep us on IPv4 and tunneled/nat'ed to IPv6 > >>for some time. > > > > Personal opinion: IPv6 is worth less than the paper its RFC is > > printed on. Ignore it and it will go away. Really. > >I am very concerned being that only 2 percent of the IPv4 pool remains. > >http://ipv6.he.net/statistics/ > >In a few months we may not be able to get more IPv4 space. What then? > NAT everyone? Ugh, with thousands of custommers thats an ugly >proposition. How do you track down abuse, subpoena issues and so many >other things... That's Y2K redux, a fear campaign. HE in particular is trying to use it as a differentiator. What is running out is virgin, never-before-assigned IPv4 space. It is like the land offices in the homestead era. Eventually they ran out of land. Yet farming continued. IPv4 addresses were initially handed out very inefficiently. There are many owners of blocks that are larger than needed. If you are qualified for a block, you are qualified to buy a block from someone who already has one. A market will happen, and I don't think it will be very expensive. Nor am I too concerned about NAT. NAT only breaks broken applications. Public servers need public addresses, but the mass market user doesn't. (Inability to handle subpoenas may be seen as an advantage...) Check out the Pouzin Society for an alternative. I've got some more on this on my web site. > > If one of your subscribers really needs to reach something only > > accessible via IPv6, they can tunnel out. But since there is no > > compatibility, the "transition" plan requires dual stack. So > > everything runs v4 until everybody is on v6. But since there's > > always more on v4 (everybody) than on v6 (those who have added the > > dual stack), there's no incentive for users to move to v4. The only > > benefit is to some ISPs, not to users. So users have little reason > > to move. (Sometimes users are smarter than some ISPs.) Plus v6 is > > an abomination, a misdesign of immense proportions, so you shouldn't > > buy into Cisco's fantasies. -- Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
