On 4/26/13 7:31 AM, "Owen DeLong" <o...@delong.com> wrote:
> >On Apr 25, 2013, at 10:49 PM, Michael Thomas <m...@mtcc.com> wrote: > >> On 04/25/2013 07:27 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: >>>> At some level, I wonder how much the feedback loop of "providers >>>> won't deploy ipv6 because everybody says they won't deploy ipv6" >>>> has caused this self-fulfilling prophecy :/ >>> It's a definite issue. The bigger issue is the financial incentives >>>are all in the >>> wrong direction. >>> >>> Eyeball networks have an incentive not to deploy IPv6 until content >>>providers >>> have done so or until they have no other choice. >> >> Yet, eyeball networks are the ones being asked to pony up all of the >> cost to put in place the hacks to keep v4 running so they don't get >> support center calls. That's a pretty asymmetric, and a potential >>opportunity. > >Quite the contrary I personally think that the abysmal rate of IPv6 >adoption among >some content providers (Are you listening, Amazon, Xbox, BING?) is just >plain shameful. Bing supports IPv6: http://www.worldipv6launch.org/ The site www.xbox.com supports IPv6 (ditto), but the Xbox device does not. My favorite place to see what content supports IPv6 is Eric Vyncke's site: http://www.vyncke.org/ipv6status/detailed.php?country=us Thus, credit to Microsoft for Bing, but points off for live.com, msn.com, microsoft.com, etc. Similarly, partial credit to Amazon for ELB on AWS [1], but points off for amazon.com, ebay.com, and for pity's sake, aws.amazon.com and amazonaws.com. [1] http://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2011/05/24/elb-ipv6-zoneapex-secu ritygroups/ > >I applaud Yahoo, Google, Facebook, and others who have adopted IPv6. I'd >like >to applaud Netflix here, but they keep going back and forth on their IPv6 >support, >so they get a one-handed clap for the moment. > >I'm trying to encourage people to push on the content providers to deploy >IPv6 >to avoid the need for eyeball networks to pony up all these bizarre hacks. > >Lee Howard has some rather interesting research showing that for eyeball >networks, the most cost effective thing up to about (IIRC) $15/address is >to >simply keep buying IPv4 addresses on the transfer market. Beyond that, it >actually becomes cheaper to simply go IPv6-only and accept the loss of >customers that won't accept that solution. See http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog56/presentations/Wednesday/wed.general.h oward.24.wmv and http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog57/presentations/Tuesday/tue.cost-ipv4-i pv6-dual-stack.howard.wmv (and for dollar signs on the second one, see TCO of IPv6 at http://new.livestream.com/internetsociety/INETDenver2013/videos/16668823 ) But to see the rest, you have come to NANOG58 in New Orleans! > >>>> On the other hand, there is The Cloud. I assume that aws and all of >>>>the >>>> other major vm farms have native v6 networks by now (?). I hooked up >>> You again assume facts not in evidence. Many cloud providers have done >>> IPv6. Rackspace stands out as exemplary in this regard. Linode has done >>> some good work in this space. >>> >>> AWS stands out as a complete laggard in this area. >> >> Heh... that's why I put all kinds of question marks and hedges :) >> That's disappointing about aws. On the other hand, if aws lights >> up v6, a huge amount of content will be v6 capable in one swell-foop. >> Which is a different problem of death by a thousand cuts of corpro >> data centers, and racked up servers in no-name cages. > >Actually, if Amazon.com lit up IPv6, it would dramatically change the >IPv6-only >client landscape. I believe they are the single largest IPv4-only content >provider >remaining. IIRC from Lee's statistics, Amazon + any 2 other members of the >Alexa 100 would make it possible for 70% or more of web traffic to go over >IPv6. Not mine; Alain Fiocco's numbers at http://6lab.cisco.com/stats/ It's not quite that positive, either, but you can see in the Information page of that site that there's a very sharp bend in which sites get the most hits. The top 15-20 are disproportionate; after that, in many cases substitute web sites are available. > >>>> v6 support on linode in, oh, less than an hour for my site. Maybe part >>>> of this just evangelizing with the Cloud folks to get the word out >>>>that >>>> v6 is both supported *and* beneficial for your site? And it might >>>>give them >>>> a leg up with "legacy" web infrastructure data centers to lure them? >>>>"Oh, >>>> your corpro IT guys won't light up v6? let me show you how easy it is >>>>on >>>> $MEGACLOUD". >>> +1 -- I encourage people to seek providers that support IPv6. >>> >> >> Name. and. shame. At some level, some amount of bs is probably useful >> to scare the suits: "OMG, VZW'S PHONES SUPPORT V6, DO WE DO THAT????". >> Roll your eyes, but, well, remember they're suits. > >I've been doing just that. Interestingly, I got a great deal of criticism >for doing >so recently. Where do you name and shame suits? Hint: it isn't NANOG. Lee, who has been known to wear a suit
