On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 09:54:21AM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Apr 8, 2010, at 8:54 AM, TJ wrote:
IPv6-only content won't be meaningful for years yet, and IPv6-only eyeballs will necessarily be given ways to reach v4 for many years to come.
To be fair - IPv6 only content may not exactly be commonplace, but there are IPv6-only networks out there ... they just tend to consist of "things" rather than "people".
For the "surfable internet", the chicken-and-egg scenario continues - as more services get reachable, it should create impetus for users - all dual stack (hopefully) ... until a threshold is crossed, when it becomes more feasible to be a general consumer who was IPv6-only (or really bad IPv4 alongside it). I also think "for years" and "for many years" are very relative terms :) ...
/TJ
I think that the creation of consumers with IPv6-only or really bad IPv4 along side it will result sooner than any threshold of IPv6-ready content is reached. I think this will be the result of not having IPv4 addresses to give those consumers rather than the result of IPv6 deployment.
Owen
on the other side of the pond, the Euros are grappling with a desire to get actual utilization of assigned numbers into something above single digits. They are shooting for 80% utilization of all assets before assigning any additional numbers. this problem has been around for a -very- long time, predating the RIRs by a couple of decades. the gist is, virtually -every- allocation/delegation exceeds the actual demand - sometimes by many orders of magnitude. in the IPv4 space, it was common to have a min allocation size of a /20 ... or 4,096 addresses ... and yet this amnt of space was allocated to someone who only needed to address "3 servers"... say six total out of a pool of four thousand ninty six. Thats a huge amnt of wasted space. If our wise and pragmatic leaders (drc, jc, et.al.) are correct, then IPv4 will be around for a very long time. What, if any, plan exists to improve the utilization density of the existant IPv4 pool? --bill