[arin-ppml] The non-deployment of IPv6

[Tony Hain]

Why do you say multi-homing is unrealistic? Do ARIN policies keep you from
getting a PI /48? If so that needs to be fixed. If not, your complaint would
appear to be an artificial justification for delaying. 

Tony

> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
> Behalf Of Shane Foster
> Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 4:25 PM
> To: John Curran; Chris Engel
> Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] The non-deployment of IPv6
> 
> I'm with a small content provider.
> 
> At the moment, I don't see us moving any of our sites to IPv6 until
> multihoming is realistic option.
> The costs aren't an issue, the code changes and config updates are
> relatively minor, but lack of multihoming options for sites that only
> need an IPv4 /24 to advertise is a blocker.
> 
> I see that there are some new (this year) Shim6 RFCs from the IETF.
> Seems unlikely that there will be any real solutions until that effort
> is finally dropped.
> 
> Thanks,
> 	Shane
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
> Behalf Of John Curran
> Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 3:43 PM
> To: Chris Engel
> Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] The non-deployment of IPv6
> 
> On Dec 9, 2009, at 4:48 PM, Chris Engel wrote:
> >
> > Well,
> >
> > If the time estimates I've seen put forward here are accurate....and
> I
> see no reason to assume they wouldn't be.... then it'll be 2-3 years
> minimum before we see anyone out there that can ONLY do IPv6.
> 
> I agree that looks like a lot of time, but there's quite a few
> assumptions in such an estimate and it could move up very quickly.
> Additionally, there will be an increasing number of clients which will
> attempt to connect via IPv6 *first*, so you actually are impacting your
> performance if you don't do IPv6 soon.
> 
> > In that time frame I'd be looking for the same sort of solution for
> public facing servers in the DMZ as I would for the rest of my
> network....namely some sort of v4 to v6 gateway service that would act
> as a proxy for my 4 machines and allow them to communicate with IPv6
> hosts.
> 
> Does your present firewall device support IPv6 NAT today?   In
> discussion this situation with other organizations, I'm generally
> finding that routers, firewalls, and load-balancers aren't what are not
> what breaks, but instead their tools such as help-desk system and
> configuration generators which simply don't know IPv6.  Finding these
> issues is a great reason to experiment with at least one public facing
> IPv6 server sooner rather than later.
> 
> /John
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.