On Thursday, October 1, 2015, Matthew Kaufman <matt...@matthew.at> wrote:
> On 10/1/2015 5:16 PM, Ca By wrote: > >> >> I run a large 464xlat dominated mobile network. >> >> IPv4 bits are materially more expensive to deliver. >> > > Isn't that simply a consequence of your engineering decision to use > 464xlat instead of native dual-stack, as was originally envisioned for the > transition? > > Steady state would be nat44, which also is materially more expensive to deliver than IPv6 > >> And, as FB has shared, IPv6 is more performant for end users, and more >> performant is more profitable >> >> > Isn't that also at least partially a consequence of your engineering > decision to use 464xlat? > > Perhaps. But it is Verizon's dual-stack in the quote, not me http://www.lightreading.com/ethernet-ip/ip-protocols-software/facebook-ipv6-is-a-real-world-big-deal/a/d-id/718395 > Matthew Kaufman > >
