Matthew Petach wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 6:34 PM, Owen DeLong<owen@delong.com> wrote:
On Oct 21, 2010, at 3:29 PM, Joe Maimon wrote:
Matthew Petach wrote:
So...uh...who's going to be first to step up and tell their customers "look, you get a v6 /56 for free with your account, but if you want v4 addresses, it's going to cost an extra $50/month." ??
Matt
Either the telephone company or the cable company. Probably both. Give me a harder one.
Joe
ROFL, Comcast is already telling their residential customers that if they want a static IPv4 address it will cost them an extra ~$60/month.
(Delta between residential and business: ~$55/month, single static IPv4 address on business circuit: $5/month)
Owen
*sigh*
But what's the delta for getting the equivalent IPv6 resource? You're comparing apples to oranges.
If comcast says "you get a static /56 of v6 for free, but a static v4 address costs $55/month", then I can see you point.
But right now, the delta is between dynamic v4 (free) and static v4 ($55), with no delta between dynamic v4 (free) and dynamic v6 (free), and no option that I've seen for static v4 ($55) vs static v6 ($???).
It's those last two cases that would drive the deprecation of v4 over time; and *that* is the step I don't foresee any provider wanting to do; certainly, not being first up to the plate to do.
Matt
How about when they put new users behind CGN/LSN? Depending on how successful that is (for them), the delta can change dramatically. It would be private v4 free, public v6 free (we hope), public v4 (static or dynamic) for $(?+). Further dependent is what they will do to existing users. I can see them choosing to be fair and making all users suffer equivalently. I can further see a potential result of huge swathes of v4 resources reusable by these companies, probably dwarfing the reclaimable resources most any other provider without a similar customer profile will have. Joe