[nycbug-talk] For and Against IPv6

Miles Nordin carton at Ivy.NET
Thu Oct 11 22:18:49 EDT 2007

>>>>> "il" == Isaac Levy <ike at lesmuug.org> writes:

    il> My current DSL isp charges me $5/mo for each IP now, new
    il> policy in the last year.

My friend offered me a free geek-community-related colo on a gigabit
link to MANDA in Darmstadt, but v6-only, because he didn't have the
v4 IP's.

In Dubai our company was only able to get a /29 on the 2Mbit/s
symmetric DSL/MPLS link we got, and really we needed more than that.

cable and cel carriers may want to use v6 because they run out of
rfc1918 space---even if they give customers fake addresses, they'd
have to reuse giving duplicate addresses to pairs of
customers in different cities.

I'm not sure how much immediate populist value the v6 _transit_ has,
but the address space reserved just for you may have some real value
for banks that buy leased lines and make IPsec tunnels to each other
for settlement or some other kind of data exchange.  Otherwise they
have to worry about colliding rfc1918 addresses, and their networks
become messy in ways that makes them expensive to manage, and insecure
because they become hard to understand and thus easy to make mistakes.
With v6, just to look at an address and tell simply with a single mask
``is this mine or yours?'', that's got to be worth something.  I
expect this isn't translated into demand because I don't think the
firewalls and ipsec appliances do v6 yet, and the sysadmins who run
them don't know v6 yet anyway.

It really peaves me, though, when people say ``with IPv6 you get
twelve bagillion addresses, and that's what's so good.''  With the
reserved bits from the MSB and LSB ends, real companies will end up
with the same number of usable v6 subnets as they have /24's in, so I think it will not have the feeling of boundless space
that pundits imply just from looking at the address size.  There's
already some grumbling about giving Interweb customers /56's or less
instead of /48's.  I think it'll feel about the same, but with no NAT.

    ap> in 6 years of pilosoft, i've had exactly two people ask if i
    ap> had v6 transit.

two current customers you mean?  because I think more than two
non-customers have asked just on this list, I think.  After seeing how
much it costs to L3-switch v6, though, I can understand it needs to be
a somewhat big operation before it's worth doing well, and I think
there are not enough of us for that.

I did some shopping from a list of ISP's in DeCIX (Frankfurt), and
although I didn't make it through the whole list, I couldn't find any
reasonably-priced dedicated-hosting with v6 over there, either, where
it's supposedly more popular.  All I found was space.net which is
charging like double or triple the reasonable rate.

It's good that he.net has a tunnel broker in NYC, though.  They didn't
used to.

anyway FWIW I am getting v6 from pins.net right now, and I think he
may be ready to start selling it over DSL---you could ask.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 304 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.nycbug.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20071011/af06ea5d/attachment.bin>

More information about the talk mailing list