[rpd] Summary of proposals: IPv4 Runout Management

[Noah]

On 10 Nov 2016 11:48, "Mark Elkins" <mje at posix.co.za> wrote:
>
> On 10/11/2016 09:14, Noah wrote:
> > If people want to deploy IPv6 they will do it but the compeling reason
> > will eventually be competition as the motivation and nothing else.
> >
> > Atleast folk i know who do it dont even dual stack in their core as the
> > prefix basically just seats on their boader router facing their ISP for
> > the purpose of announcing it and that is it.
> >
> > So announcing an IPv6 prefix to an upstream provider imho doesnt cut it
> > and its easy to do.
>
> I'm disturbed by this email as you could be right. I obviously hope you
> are wrong or only right in a small number of marginal cases.
>

I am not as that is the reality on the ground at least from my experience
:-).

> I'd like to see a study on IPv6 in the AFRINIC region.
>
> 1 - We can already calculate which announced ASNs don't have IPv6.
>
> 2 - We thus know who has an IPv6 block of addresses...
>
> 3 - and can correspondingly see if those blocks are in the Routing
> Tables (a job Andrew has already undertaken).

Yes such a study would come in handy as it would paint the exact picture I
was referring too.

Meanwhile there is the visual outlook.

https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=per-country-ipv6-adoption&tab=per-country-ipv6-adoption


>
> * If its common practise to simply announce one's IPv6 on the boarder
> router and leave IPv6 deployment to that step - which seems quite a
> simple exercise (you use the word "easy") - then anyone who has a block
> and has not done at least this and has had their block for 12+ month
> really needs an official reprimand.
>

Not so fast. We have less motivated  net engineers out there who are not
motivated at the moment to do it.

That IPv4 protocol is still kicking and flying and yeah they can still NAT
and get things rolling fast.

Dont forget almost all the Telecoms in this continent have at least some
IPv6 prefix seated with them and yet my 3G/4G smart phone still still gets
an RFC1918 address every time I get some data bundle fire-up.

> 4 - More interesting to measure would be "are there internal services
> using the IPv6 addresses" - such as the Reverse DNS entries for the IPv6
> block itself. Another measurement would be whether the email contact
> addresses are reachable via IPv6 transport.
>
> At least that would be a better start.
>

Obviously but not so fast. Those internal services like DNS and WWW seat
behind some Firewalls that either dont support IPv6 or doing v6 could
result into some buggy scenarios. No one will risk that.

Secondly, those internal services dont normally need a lot of address space
:-). So a single /24 IPv4 could be allocated to some services and couple
with some NAT Port fowarding behind some Firewall and all is rossy.  So
IPv6 in this case becomes less of a priority.

>
> > Noah
>
> Noah - please talk to the folk you know who don't even dual stack in
> their core and see if you can convince them to change their ways.
>
> Please bring back success stories to the community.

Do you think I have not tried. I have and like I said, i will leave it to
the competition to be the motivation some day.

More like hands of my network :-)...

>
>         ----------------
>
> Money - either saved (carrot) or loss (stick) - should be a basic
motivator.
> Honour, fame or being up there with the best could be another basic
> motivator.
>
> Competition - only works if someone starts the ball rolling. Why bother
> if it looks like IPv4 will be around for years (which the one policy
> looks to try and do).
>

Well we do it others are doing it and that is how we will get the ball
rolling.


> So sad.
>
> ps - I was giving talks on IPv6 deployment at the AFRINIC-8 meeting in
> Rabat, Morocco (May 2008) and got my own block before that in Jan 2007
> which was up and running with core services within a month or two.
>

I remember that talk as I was there but even in .za itself, the stats are
like sad but promising.

> pps - IPv6 deployment is never, by nature, instant. It however can never
> be achieved until its started.
>

Ofcourse and as it stands, some are at least firing the protocol up on the
boarder routers and at most announcing to their ISPs.
> --
> Mark James ELKINS  -  Posix Systems - (South) Africa
> mje at posix.co.za       Tel: +27.128070590  Cell: +27.826010496
> For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za
>

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20161111/68191532/attachment.html>