This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] AW: [ipv6-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] AW: [ipv6-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] AW: [ipv6-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Nick Hilliard
nick at inex.ie
Thu Oct 18 13:33:39 CEST 2007
Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote: > There is plenty of work to do elsewhere too, but the CPE issue is > quickly becoming a significant hurdle. On the contrary, the CPE issue has been a major problem for many years. It's simply one which has been ignored for far too long. > The reason for that is that those > tend to run IPv4 NAT which makes easy IPv6 tunneling hard. We really > need those boxes to support IPv6 in the near future. This all comes down to economics. Adding IPv6 capabilities to CPE access devices costs money, and CPE devices are often chosen purely on the basis of cost alone. Ergo, IPv6 capability is bad for business, if you manufacture CPE boxen. The real problem here is the lifetime of CPE devices. I'm going to estimate a rough half-life of 3 years. This is going to mean an awful lot of CPE access device swapouts to move to teh ipv6 intarweb. Which brings things back to the access ISPs: all access ISPs should be encouraged in the strongest possible terms to deploy devices now which are ipv6 capable, or which can be upgraded to be ipv6 capable. This will put pressure on the manufacturers to introduce v6 boxes to the marketplace because there are almost no low-end units which will do ipv6 out of the box right now. For a laugh, or maybe a cry, check out: http://www.google.com/search?q=ipv6+%2Bsite%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.netopia.com http://www.google.com/search?q=ipv6+%2Bsite%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.belkin.com http://www.google.com/search?q=ipv6+%2Bsite%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.netgear.com http://www.google.com/search?q=ipv6+%2Bsite%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.2wire.com http://www.google.com/search?q=ipv6+%2Bsite%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.draytek.com http://www.google.com/search?q=ipv6+%2Bsite%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.linksys.com http://www.google.com/search?q=ipv6+%2Bsite%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.zyxel.com read: "heuston, we have a problem" Nick -- Network Ability Ltd. | Head of Operations | Tel: +353 1 6169698 3 Westland Square | INEX - Internet Neutral | Fax: +353 1 6041981 Dublin 2, Ireland | Exchange Association | Email: nick at inex.ie
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] AW: [ipv6-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] AW: [ipv6-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]