On 3/12/19 00:12, Mark Andrews wrote:
On 3 Dec 2019, at 13:31, Valdis Klētnieks <valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu> wrote:
On Mon, 02 Dec 2019 11:04:24 -0800, Fred Baker said:
I believe that Dmitry's point is that we will still require IPv4 addresses for new organizations deploying dual-stack
I think I understood what you meant, but not what you said.
If someone is dual stack, they are IPv6-capable and IPv4-capable.
And they're going to need v4 addresses to be v4-capable, aren't there?
A new corporation that's trying to spin up dual-stack is going to need 2 address allocations, a v4 and a v6.
Why does a new organisation need to have any global IPv4 addresses of their own at all? In most cases they don’t. It’s only inertia that is causing people to want to have their own global IPv4 addresses.
We have IPv4 as a service which gives on demand shared IPv4 addresses. Millions of people reach the IPv4 Internet every day using IPv4AAS. CDNs are dual stack and provide the IPv4 presence on the net. These days these are shared addresses. VPNs run over IPv6 and they can in turn run over IPv6 in IPv4 tunnels when the remote doesn’t support native IPv6. Its just another level on encapsulation. Email is often out sourced so you don’t need your own IPv4 addresses for that. Then there is in the cloud for other services, again you don’t need your own IPv4 addresses.
Wwll, yeah.. you don't need IPv4 addresses if you are going to be using somebody else's networks and services. Not that you should, though.... -- Fernando Gont SI6 Networks e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492