9 Feb
2011
9 Feb
'11
6:56 p.m.
Scott Helms <khelms@ispalliance.net> writes:
IPv6 for some ISPs will be extraordinarily painful because of legacy layer 2 gear (usually DSLAMs that drop any frame with IPv6 in the EtherType field), inability to upgrade customer gear efficiently (again mainly a DSL problem where TR-069 isn't in use), and the requirement to replace PPPoE/oA termination gear (like Redback SMSs) means that a small telco (say 3000 DSL lines) could be facing a multi-million dollar expense to enable IPv6 for customers.
For ISPs in this circumstance the choice will be CGNAT rather than IPv6
Or 6rd and go native on their permanent prefix as the forklift upgrade schedule allows. Oh well, it's better than nothing or Crummier Grade NAT. -r