On 10/4/19 4:55 PM, Dave Taht wrote:
not being able to get a static IPv6 address out of comcast, my hurricane tunnel getting blocked by netflix, the still-huge prefix sub-distribution problem. The idea of dynamic 2 week prefixes in part of the world prone to earthquakes doesn't work for me...
I can think of several programmatic ways to deal with that. Or you can just buy Comcast's business service, which I think includes one IPv4 address.
that said, we need more running code, still, which only then can get into a deployment, and nobody's funding that.
Do you mean CeroWRT specifically, or code in general? I was thinking about some Hackathon projects to add IPv6 capability to open source projects. Seems to me the hardest part is making sure there's an adequate test environment.
But Mr.Rey's reference about IPv6 deployment rates also makes a good point! Nobody cares about deployment rates. What good does it do, if people don't use it ? This is more realistic : https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html During the week, we are below 25%.
(Replying to an item upthread) APNIC's statistics show that in almost every network that has IPv6, it is almost always used.
One entertaining thing I've been up to is checking the state of multiple kinds of deployment in the coffee shops of the world with a string of simple tests anyone can do (after we package them up better)
Yeah, we need the GoGo and ATTWifi and such of the world to deploy.
Since there was demand for more IPv4, perhaps that would also fuel more updates to ipv6, as both require middlebox updates...
As for money to make middleboxes better in *any* way, don't make me laugh. During the cerowrt project we approached everybody making money from the internet and multiple non-profits and got nowhere. I spent my own fortune on it, and got a lot of volunteers onboard, especially in the openwrt universe... and made things better, but I got nothing left.
We need a new kame-like project to jointly handle the cracks in the ipv6 network architecture, standards and code, at the very least.
The costs of "mo ipv4" are trivial in comparison.
Another thought I've had: One of the reasons small ISPs can't deploy IPv6 is that they don't control the features in the CPE, because they don't buy enough. I know a couple CPE vendors who would be happy to provide a specific feature set for a guaranteed purchase of a couple thousand units a month. This sounds like a good business to me: if a bunch of small ISPs each contract for a specific number of units, but require RIPE-554, RFC7084, and RFC8085, we could both get the needed features, and get a larger volume discount than they get now. Saving $1 per CPE is better than spending $20 for an IPv4 address for every new user. Please confirm my math. :)
3 months ago, I turned DECNET off on my network. It was actually not even an IT/network decision; customer decided they were done with a product, and we de-commissioned the tools with DECNET. Business decision. We run OS/2 Warp, MS-DOS, Windows 95, HPUX, Solaris, Windows 2000, and I probably forget some. Please note the ipv4 extensions stuff won't work with most that "legacy" ipv4 stuff. It can, however, enable new applications and services to exist. Most of the IOT and SDN stacks already do work. Most don't have decent ipv6 support due to resource constraints.
Perversely I kind of like the idea of a portion of the internet immune from legacy windows worms and viruses....
DECNET isn't on the Internet. I don't care if some crusty old boxes in dark corners of data centers whisper IPv4 among themselves. How would I even know?
In 20 years, I will still need IPv4. And it seems possible we can make more.
And I have enough IPv4 on my hands for the foreseeable future. I bought some recently, just in case.
I encourage the WG group to read this : https://www.internetgovernance.org/2019/02/20/report-on-ipv6-get-ready-for-a... And the full text : https://www.internetgovernance.org/wp-content/uploads/IPv6-Migration-Study-f... Serious work, paid by ICANN. We cited that work in our presos on this subject as that was also key on gilmore, paul wouters and myself to start looking hard at what it would take to make ipv4 better in multiple ways. Please look it over!?
The ipv4 unicast extensions project is one outgrowth of that: A string of trivial patches to a couple OSes and routing daemons and we're well on our way to being able to add 420m new addresses to the internet, within a 10 year time horizon.
You just mentioned your un-upgradable "OS/2 Warp, MS-DOS, Windows 95, HPUX, Solaris, Windows 2000," and now you say it's easy to upgrade. Lee