On 22/03/2014 18:50, Tore Anderson wrote:
* Nick Hilliard
the level of pain associated with continued deployment of ipv4-only services is still nowhere near the point that ipv6 can be considered a viable alternative.
This depends on who you're asking; as a blanket statement it's demonstrably false: For the likes of T-Mobile USA¹ and Facebook², or even myself³, IPv6-only isn't just an «alternative». It's «happening».
FB, T-mobile and you are all using ipv6->ipv4 protocol translators because ipv6-only services are not a viable alternative at the moment. The advantage that using ipv6 gives in these deployment scenarios is that it scales beyond the amount of address space available from rfc1918. As a side effect, it also makes native end-to-end ipv6 connectivity pleasant. Sadly, ipv4 address availability continues to be necessary at the same run rate as before, except in situations where CGN is a possibility. Nick
[1] http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/TMobile-Goes-IPv6-Only-on-Android-44-Devi... [2] https://www.dropbox.com/s/doazzo5ygu3idna/WorldIPv6Congress-IPv6_LH%20v2.pdf [3] http://www.ipspace.net/IPv6-Only_Data_Centers
Tore