Hi, On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 08:54:01PM +0100, Willy MANGA wrote: > Le 22/09/2017 à 08:47, [email protected] a écrit : > > [...] > > I'm working around IPv6 since 2001. Anna and Randy probably since before > > that. We have deployed IPv6. It didn't enable us to completely get rid of > > IPv4 within our networks. That also didn't solve any issue for 3rd party > > networks -- they all still need IPv4 addresses. > > being a newbie here can you please explain briefly why, as of today , > these people really need IPv4 addresses ? Or at least why they cannot > start a transition process towards IPv6?
The problem is not "the new people" - the problem is "all the other people".
What good is having an all-ipv6-network when your users will not be able
to shop at, say, www.amazon.de, because that content site is IPv4-only?
So you need to have some sort of IPv6-to-IPv4 translator device - and that
one needs a few IPv4 adresses.
And vice versa, if you host content, you'll need to be able to serve your
content to those ISPs like Telefonica that have "no plans to implement
IPv6, we can do this all with Carrier Grade NAT44!" [they did a press
release to that extent, a few years ago...] - so, a few IPv4 addresses
to tack on your load balancers, so they can server IPv6-only content to
IPv4-only users...
This is the real dilemma here: new entrants on the market feel the pain
of old entrants not moving forward.
Of course for the old entrants, this is a highly convenient way to keep
their costs down, and everyone else's costs high ("externalize", as it
has been said before)
Gert Doering
-- concerned Internet user
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
