> On Jul 5, 2015, at 11:35 AM, Mel Beckman <m...@beckman.org> wrote: > > I guess the WISPs I advise get better advice :)
I think this is a key item for people to have in mind. We can all follow poor advice and add in new layers of NATs, possibly including certain applications within the NAT cone, or we can deliver DS, or DS-like service via several technologies. There are a lot of devices that can do NAT from roll your own Linux or pfSense style up to commercial solutions that vendors will sell you. (I recall cisco pitching the ASR1K for this years ago). You could even use something like LISP to do these redundancy things within your network. I would treat NAT the same way people treat CDNs which is find the large destinations and encourage people to use IPv6 for those. Looking at the “top sites” here: http://www.alexa.com/topsites Almost all of them are IPv6 enabled. You can even poke at sites with external tools like this: http://ipv6-test.com/validate.php Frank Bulk also monitors most of the major carrier sites for their IPv6 reliability and stability. He often gets me to contact our IT department to address the issues they have coping with the traffic volumes involved on the IPv6 side for the www.us.ntt.net and www.ntt.net sites. (and yes frank, I got your email and texts yesterday :) ) I would say there is no one right/wrong way to do this, but getting the core of your network IPv6 enabled first then pushing to your edges is a must-do item for the upcoming quarter or two. I was once advised on technical issues where I explained in perfect technical detail the problems and solution path, but the management started talking about the optics of the issue. Take advantage of the NBC, etc coverage to ensure these priorities are taken care of. This may feel like stooping low to some people, but it’s important to get any IPv6 items off your todo list. There is a great ipv6-ops list as well out there where detailed questions can be asked and answered amongst those that are doing similar things. While I dislike what T-Mobile USA has done from a technical side, their success shows that the IPv6 only edge *is* possible. This means we can take away the idea that we *must* have IPv4 for a device to be reachable/considered “online”. I anxiously await the results of the apple/IPv6/iOS9 changeover and the increased traffic that will occur as a result. I think 2016 will drive the traffic levels to many multiples where they are now and much closer to parity on the global backbones. - Jared
