[arin-discuss] ipv6 technology supplier phone bank?

[Lee Howard]

----- Original Message ----
> From: "michael.dillon at bt.com" <michael.dillon at bt.com>
> To: arin-discuss at arin.net
> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 5:04:54 AM
> Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] ipv6 technology supplier phone bank?
> 
> > > If IPv6 doesn't require a new home gateway, but only gets 
> > you to 50% 
> > > of the Internet, which is cheaper? 
> 
> Crazy question. Anyone deploying IPv6 to the home user is going
> to make sure that those IPv6 customers will get access to all of
> the Internet. Flashable home gateways, especially those based on
> Linux, can be easily upgraded to support IPv6, so not all
> home gateways will need to be replaced.

How does that get you to the 50% of the Internet that isn't on IPv6?
Are CPE vendors going to provide code for those gateways, or are 
ISPs going to write code and take support calls?

> > CGN will break just about everything but simple html and pop, 
> > and can't begin to scale in the face of the AJAX fad. 
> 
> Then perhaps we need to think of web content providers as "suppliers"
> and start contacting them too, to find out when they plan to support
> IPv6 access to their content services. One AJAX app which is known 
> to create problems even with traditional NAT is Google Maps, but 
> fortunately for the IPv6 folks, Google supports IPv6 already, and is
> willing to peer widely on IPv6.

I strongly recommend that every ISP look at its customers' favorite
sites and find out the IPv6 plans for each of them.  

> > > What happens to competition if users can't switch providers and 
> > > receive a comparable IPv4 service?
> 
> They can still switch providers and receive a comparable IPv6
> service. Competition will not disappear.

You think IPv6 service will be comparable to Internet access with
unCGNed IPv4?


> >So far the 
> > few messages I am aware of are; not coherent; nothing more 
> > than an acronym; have not clear timeframes or orders ... YMMV
> 
> This is the reason for the IPv6 Sprint. To get people to firm
> up their plans and their timeframes. To put it bluntly, if you know
> that IPv4 will runout in November 2011 and you do not have a firm
> plan to release a product supporting IPv6 before then, plus have
> clear timeframes for the development work needed for this IPv6
> version, then customers will look elsewhere. In addition, it is
> necessary to take customer processes into account. If an ISP needs
> to do three months of lab testing plus three months of field trials
> before committing to a product, then you had better not plan on
> releasing your product in November 2011. It had better be out in 
> May 2011.
> 
> This applies to all kind of products; devices, software, web-sites
> and so on. 

I complete agree, but I think Tony's looking for more detail.
Do home gateways need to support both SLAAC and DHCPv6,
as both a client and as a server?  Do they need to provide stateful
DHCPv6?  Do they need to be DNS servers, or relay dDNS
updates?  If somebody daisy-chains a wi-fi router behind an
edge gateway, how does it get a prefix delegation from the 
gateway's prefix delegation?  

In other words, people need to be deploying IPv6 now, so they
can find out what they don't know, and have time for vendors to 
fix bugs in features they need.  Simply ordering a heap of IPv6
and expecting to be ready isn't enough.

Lee