On 29-mei-2007, at 3:35, Donald Stahl wrote:
Actually setting up a dual-stack infrastructure isn't very difficult-
anyone who has done so would probably agree. The problems (as has
already been pointed out) come from management, billing and the like.
I don't know what kinds of weird management and billing systems are
out there, so I won't say that's not relevant, but the most difficult
part about IPv6 deployment today is provisioning, in my opinion. If
you as a service provider have a router and a customer has a host (or
more than one for either) then you can do stateless autoconfig and
life is good. However, when the customer has a router then there is
no way to make that work automatically without manual configuration
similar to what you get now with a CPE that receives a single IPv4
address over PPP or DHCP on the WAN side and does NAT on the LAN side.
Then there is the DNS issue: since you can't predict what addresses
your customer's machines are going to have, you can't pre-populate
the DNS. DHCP for IPv6 is largely missing in action so that's not a
100% solution. It is possible to have clients register their
addresses in the DNS using dynamic DNS updates, but that's not all
that widely supported either and either you have no security or you
have confused customers. But you can always delegate the reverse DNS
to the customer and make it their problem. :-)
Testing now with a small group of technically competent people
would seem to be a better idea than waiting until IPv6 is already
widely deployed and then trying to test a rollout.
# traceroute6 www.nanog.org
traceroute6: hostname nor servname provided, or not known
That would be a start... It took years to get the IETF to eat its own
dog food, though.
