[arin-ppml] How hard is it to transition to IPv6?

Kevin Kargel kkargel at polartel.com
Fri Mar 27 16:35:49 EDT 2009

> --On March 27, 2009 11:25:56 AM -0500 Leo Bicknell <bicknell at ufp.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/032509-google-ipv6-easy.html
> >
> > At the IETF meeting there was a panel discussion on transitioing
> > to IPv6, at which Google gave their perspective.  I know a lot of
> > folks have been looking for some more concrete information on how
> > hard the transition will be, and here's one companies's take on it.
> >
> > I would like to applaud Google for both being out front and talking
> > about their experiences.
> For some it's still impossible.  Eg any cable operator, why?  Consumer
> devices still don't have v6.  Even many "business" class devices do not.
> In my own experience I've run across Watchguard Firebox X Edge series, all
> lower end juniper ssg/netscreen devices -- though i'm told you can enable
> it from the CLI but it's unsupported, Juniper's M7i ASM as of 8.5R4.2
> while
> it'll let you setup stateful firewalling stuff for v6 connections, it just
> doesn't work at all.  I've not tried any other ASM/Services w/ v6 though.
> And I'm sure the list goes on.

Difficult yes, impossible no.  There is nothing to stop a cable operator
from running IPv4 inside, even on private addresses, and then doing PAT to
the outside.  One to one PAT would function.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3224 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20090327/9d33a8ad/attachment-0001.bin>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list