On Jun 7, 2011, at 10:42 PM, Christopher Palmer wrote:
The title of this ongoing thread is giving me heart palpitations.
Content access over IPv6 may help "justify" ISPs investing in IPv6, but it in no means is a prerequisite technically.
LSNs are "fine" when deployed in parallel with IPv6 IMHO. There has to be a pathway to "good" networking.
How many of them are you planning on maintaining? May I quote you on this after you've been doing so for a year and received 2 or three lovely FISA subpoenas for your LSN logs?
To Lorenzo's point - I really think the next big hurdle in the transition is getting access numbers to something respectable. World IPv6 Day has only be going for a few hours, but things seem to be going fine, and it's our hope (currently) to keep www.xbox.com available over IPv6 indefinitely. I expect other participants will keep IPv6 enabled for some or all of their respective portfolios.
I agree with Lorenzo to a point, but... Access will happen in due time by virtue of IPv4 runout. If content is available dual-stack ahead of that, it dramatically reduces the need for (and load on) LSN. If it is not, then, LSN is going to be a much much uglier situation to an extent that it might even have a catch-22 effect on IPv6 deployment in the eyeball networks.
This leads me to worry that in 6-18 months we'll be in a position where a lot of major content has permanently transitioned, and we're still at <1% access range. That will be awkward.
Not really.
I'm not an ISP - but I absolutely expect that IPv6 roll-outs have long time-horizons and are fairly complex. So I hope folks are looking at IPv6 NOW, and not simply waiting for Google/Bing/Yahoo/Interwebz to enable permanent content access and organizational justification.
I don't think any of them are really waiting for that. However, I do think getting to that point is actually more critical at this juncture than getting the eyeball networks fully deployed. Owen
Christopher.Palmer@microsoft.com IPv6 @ Microsoft
-----Original Message----- From: Owen DeLong [mailto:owen@delong.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 8:48 PM To: Lorenzo Colitti Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day
On Jun 7, 2011, at 7:01 PM, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 11:24 PM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote: Moving them to IPv6 and hoping that enough of the content providers move forward fast enough to minimize the extent of the LSN deployment required.
The problem here is not content, it's access. Look at World IPv6 day. What percentage of web content is represented? Probably order of 10%. How about access? Our public stats still say 0.3%
LSN won't be required by failure of access providers to migrate.
LSN will be required by failure of content providers to turn on AAAA.
LSN is required when access providers come across the following two combined constraints:
1. No more IPv4 addresses to give to customers. 2. No ability to deploy those customers on IPv6.
For all but the most inept of access providers, they will have some ability to put customers on IPv6 prior to the day they would have to deploy LSN.
Owen