>Yes there can be some things to shake out to implement it, but once those are done, they're done.
That's absolutely not true. Tier 1 support will have to deal with v6 issues. Customers will have additional issues due to IPv6. Absolutely more than a v4 only network (today, not speaking for the future). >What are your end users talking to that is IPv4-only these days, because it’s not much pretty much all the e-mail/cloud/office/docs things are IPv6 these days, and yeah it’s harder to remember 2620:fe::fe than 9.9.9.9 but who besides a few of us still have phone numbers memorized either these days? Little websites named after a forest and an auction website for old junk (Amazon and Ebay). On Mon, Dec 1, 2025 at 2:23 PM Jared Mauch via NANOG <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Dec 1, 2025, at 2:06 PM, Tom Beecher via NANOG <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> > >>> this thread has done nothing except rehash the same viewpoints that get > >> discussed ad nauseam for the last however many years. > >> > >> I'm not sure if you just don't see it or you're being funny. > > > > > > It's a correct statement. > > > > "IPv6 doesn't work" : Google's stats show that just shy of 50% of all > their > > traffic is native V6. Most of the largest CDNs will give you similar > > answers. Yes there can be some things to shake out to implement it, but > > once those are done, they're done. > > > > "My customers don't ask for it." : Customers don't ask for IPv4. They > don't > > ask for NAT/CGNAT either. But you do those things I'm sure, because as > you > > said, they just want things to work. > > > > The answer is really money. You made a business decision not to incur the > > hardware/software/support costs to implement V6 for your customers. > That's > > fine, no shame in that. Maybe that will never be a problem for you, > maybe > > someday it will and it will cost you. Who knows. > > > > But just be honest and call it what it is, instead of half baked > statements > > that have been repeated for decades. > > > Exactly. > > Talking to friends at companies that do social networking stuff pretty > much all their traffic (over 90%) is from mobile devices, and when I look > at the big 3 mobile networks in the US they all do IPv6. Their MVNO’s > might vary, but the main networks do IPv6. > > I find myself having to tether off their networks when I’m on IPv4 only > networks to access things like my hypervisors and other assets that are > IPv6-only because they have superior networking these days. > > If you are doing IPv4-only, you are only harming yourself long-term. The > solutions are there for all the things you think you will encounter. For > the most part it’s 96 more bits, no magic. > > Yes there are a few nuances to be aware of, like proxy-arp saves a lot of > people when they do kinky things in IPv4 and proxy-NDP is there, but not in > the same way on many platforms. One of the last big hurdles out there was > IPv6 support for VTEP in FRR in my mind and that gap was recently closed. > > I also happen to think that Apple got it wrong when they rolled private > relay out, they kept the inbound tunnel protocol to outbound proxy behavior > on the same address family when they could have upgraded it on the outbound > side to IPv6 which would have closed the gap even more. > > What are your end users talking to that is IPv4-only these days, because > it’s not much pretty much all the e-mail/cloud/office/docs things are IPv6 > these days, and yeah it’s harder to remember 2620:fe::fe than 9.9.9.9 but > who besides a few of us still have phone numbers memorized either these > days? > > Do you need a ton of IPv4 space? Not really, but if you’re a cable > company like RCN, yeah you’re not doing any upgrades, but if you are > leaving assets on IPv4 just because you are leaving them on IPv4, then at > some point you are just wasting money. > > Send it to me and Tom so we can buy more hockey tickets. > > - Jared > _______________________________________________ > NANOG mailing list > > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/NMBYWMNZ7ROM6WMGFJ7IAYLKPFQG3BUO/ _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/5M7ANDNUNQRIODBM5B6IGSH3P4XPSBYJ/
