Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[rpd] A typical conversation with a service provider on v6

Mark Tinka mark.tinka at
Mon Jun 16 14:39:12 UTC 2014

On Monday, June 16, 2014 03:03:36 PM Seun Ojedeji wrote:

> But we are already assuming there is such v6 specific
> service as that is what is used as a motivation to move.

I'm not sure of any IPv6-only services that are not used 
expressly to encourage IPv6 take-up, but it is feasible to 
assume that as more and more of the remaining IPv4 space is 
allocated from RIR's to their members, new online resources 
are going to be on IPv6 only.

> A content provider does not need to worry about moving
> to v6 because a content provider is just a glorified
> enduser.

Think again.

If you take Facebook, for example, it is a well-known fact 
that they have moved nearly 98% of their internal (east-to-
west server-to-server communications) to IPv6.

> By folks I meant the ISPs. We are saying customers will
> move the ISPs however at the same time, we both know
> that customers don't really care about the numbers but
> about the service. ;)

And that is why customers will switch to ISP's who have an 
IPv6 solution, not because of IPv6, but because they can get 
connectivity to much (or all) of the Internet.

> Maybe v6 does not need the much hype afterall.

Yes and no, actually.

It matters in the operator community to maintain growth of 
the Internet. The Internet is still a mesh of autonomous 
systems, after all.

It does not matter much to simple customers (who are the 
majority) because all their want is Twitter. And make no 
mistake, they will find someone who can give it to them, one 
way or the other.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list