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

[rpd] Migrating quickly to IPv6

Owen DeLong owen at
Tue Jun 5 21:15:53 UTC 2018

> On Jun 5, 2018, at 12:44 , sm+afrinic at wrote:
> Hi Lee,
> [Subject line changed]
> At 08:44 AM 05-06-2018, Lee Howard wrote:
>> Done collaboratively, I can imagine ISPs, IXPs, and web hosting companies migrating quickly to IPv6 with just a small translator infrastructure between them. It could be similar to what we've seen in several parts of Africa where a small old-fashioned infrastructure (land lines, banks) have enabled Africa to leapfrog much of the world (mobile phones, phone payments).
> There is an ICANN presentation about IPv6 deployment in several countries.  It could be interpreted as IPv6 is not a replacement for IPv4.  One of the points in the above is that a migration entails some cooperation between different entities.  There are also issues, e.g. what to do about mobile phones which only have IPv4 support.

OK, there’s a difference in perspective about IPv6 being a replacement for IPv4 depending on the timeframe of your focus.

Long term, there is no other viable candidate for IPv4 replacement available today and therefore IPv6 MUST replace IPv4 if the internet is to preserve any semblance of its current functionality for a growing population of internet users.

Medium term, I believe that IPv6 will replace IPv4 as the lingua franca of the Internet. This does not mean that IPv4 will disappear from the world (or even the public Internet) in this time frame, but it does mean that more and more traffic will shift to IPv6 and at some point, IPv6 will represent a sufficient volume of traffic that a growing number of eyeball providers will consider IPv4 a “value added” service that can be provided only to customers willing to pay a premium for it (some providers will simply stop providing IPv4 support, or, provide it strictly via some translation mechanism).

In fact, today, some mobile providers are already at that point (not providing native IPv4 support and only translation mechanisms).

Here’s how I see things progressing from where we are today: Note, some countries (and even regions) will lag this timeline (Africa is likely one of the worst laggards based on experience to date) others may lead it slightly…

	Some mobile providers are IPv6-only native with NAT64 or other translation based solutions for IPv4.

	IPv4 is still the “default” ISP service for most providers.

	You can still get away with calling it “Internet Access” even if it doesn’t include the whole internet.

T+2 years:
	In most places, you won’t be able to really claim you deliver “internet access” unless it includes IPv6.

	Most mobile carriers will be native IPv6 only with translation for IPv4.

	Most eyeball providers will still include IPv4 along side the IPv6 internet service(s) they sell.

	It will still be difficult to sell an IPv6-only “Internet Access” product unless it includes translation for IPv4.

T+4 years:
	Many eyeball providers will start considering IPv4 a value-added service and turn it off for customers that
	don’t elect to pay a premium to keep it.

	IPv4 translation may still be necessary, but progressively less so.

	Carriers that want to support IPv4-only customers and/or customers with IPv4-only devices will have to start
	providing translation to reach IPv6-only web sites.

	More and more web sites will start turning off their IPv4 services depending on eyeball providers to do
	translation where necessary.

T+10 years:
	IPv4 will start to disappear from peering sessions.

T+15 years:
	Hardly anyone will use IPv4 outside of their local institution.



More information about the RPD mailing list