[AfriNIC-rpd] Do we push for more V4 or advocate dual stack ??

[Alain Patrick AINA]

> > On Aug 30, 2007, at 10:16 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
> >> For running dual-stack, you don't need public IPv4 addresses.
> >
> > I thought that at a bare minimum, you needed public IPv4 addresses
> > for the NAT gateways and any public facing IPv4 services.
>
> That's the ideal situation, but not the only path.

hmmm. what are the alternatives ?

> Yes, I can see that situation, but not a barrier that you can't sort out.
>
> In the initial stage of the deployment, you don't need high performance
> (hardware support for IPv6), so even in the case of an ISP that can't
> support IPv6 in ANY of their actual boxes, which I really doubt may be the
> case, you can always run IPv6 from a PC with Linux, BSD, etc.
>
> I don't really think this should be a barrier. We shouldn't advocate for an
> overnight deployment, but for an incremental one, which may mean running
> IPv6 initially from a single box in the network, even if it is only
> transition traffic.

once again nobody is setting barriers on v6 deployment. Folk are just having 
operational look of thing.

Deployment even at the initial stage for xSP means more that having a v6 box 
reachable.

--alain