IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Thoughts about wider operational input

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Sat, 02 April 2022 21:33 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A6073A1533 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Apr 2022 14:33:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.109
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.109 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GmKsh1Vnt023 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Apr 2022 14:33:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf1-x42f.google.com (mail-pf1-x42f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 008C83A1765 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 2 Apr 2022 14:32:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf1-x42f.google.com with SMTP id bo5so5617240pfb.4 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 02 Apr 2022 14:32:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=T3g+CapDUpmMHIhR8t4slVdBVZUqpgQtTohJjlvQm3g=; b=SRxkuE7Ja/GTQrwaWdzCMXTLsx/kTqck9fvIdOCyoO2S+Pakq9W5aws5Pim0YnYDN3 GKj+EAIka/jlyK3w+nRsK6TQBr15SrzN6fIG0tcaOhkTy9F+2phMbUF+ZDTy4OMTdx0D cK8D9pgvbqDg/NiHRt/zr6ZY3pKOH9/mOl8beAxX8p7h2s0wfHGOPKmdkTgE7bJfQpIO b2B8dhkuewSaApVFS4wEpgC+LReSIClSh2P90xBve2QXAYa4v294riJ+MeFT6S3jKRlf 0hK/ydmR6BUH1woLtSHh1mv2ScaYDayJBDEDDIe3kErgIpnRU6rXShmFO953dZZUMvbE CxLg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=T3g+CapDUpmMHIhR8t4slVdBVZUqpgQtTohJjlvQm3g=; b=55I5M4bOVDwF1uPXMPL5WhE/KLU5FAtaH1KIkirlv/tRB9LIj0q/CkwNS3+XLB+E0q m12UEDmB1K4Qo94e2Hc+yOB2rb7vAJWiv8WzZotUQYOi2A2Jatps3DussERU3S+cQchm C7RscggKVVnVEOo23p2KrcZqgDdTpMgFas1aa7iK1DUSEGwPuSO6KmeJznfl0WNPZ77u 2FIP0lBRlKC38HfcMFnvpv6dmsWWAkiRzpuxEc2Jnv6CiW6LUxWnJA2D4RJAWA6U5Pte xG7ZFzuIyiftt1IUsXI4wj3xS9Oxh/40fb99h/q7QSlnZ5ITMEnjZhHRJdyDP0WCunbP tygA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531dA4WeaS8y4QHE5ZPF6eMOoosvoXLnmepyIxTGUQv0KyTR7dRC U2fk1EAhIGKxbhQog7eALgGy2VJ+QOcspw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJznJjZi8qKCaQp+8ZJeVa+sbBWB5271zm/N6VN9L7z0EgJTACpEhQsdgYsdyp1V2YTFpWV4dw==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:5fcb:0:b0:382:162c:5176 with SMTP id t194-20020a635fcb000000b00382162c5176mr20519217pgb.257.1648935177023; Sat, 02 Apr 2022 14:32:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e003:1005:b501:80b2:5c79:2266:e431? ([2406:e003:1005:b501:80b2:5c79:2266:e431]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y11-20020aa793cb000000b004fb597d85b2sm7055901pff.160.2022.04.02.14.32.54 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 02 Apr 2022 14:32:56 -0700 (PDT)
To: Xipengxiao <xipengxiao@huawei.com>, Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>, Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com>
Cc: v6ops list <v6ops@ietf.org>
References: <52661a3d-75dc-111a-3f23-09b10d7cb8d4@gmail.com> <A72CDDDB-CDCE-4EAF-B95E-997C764DB2C4@gmail.com> <9175dc32-45c1-e948-c20a-3bcc958b77b9@gmail.com> <YjmJQMNgnJoSInUw@Space.Net> <D75EF08F-6A41-41B2-AFB2-649CBCC1D83E@consulintel.es> <CAPt1N1nRnYUFA=yyJHx6t52yqWbmcd2Tf1H8gQuCZBd3Q3VqJw@mail.gmail.com> <7F4AEB43-4B24-4A21-AE9D-3EB512B98C46@consulintel.es> <8fac4314b8244ba6b33eea68694296d0@huawei.com> <9A13E47B-75D0-443F-9EE9-D2917ACB2D0F@consulintel.es> <CAO42Z2xUG+BXj+VQpajed9aGjH+q-HR7RX7C-T4DsTbouz7xWQ@mail.gmail.com> <4a9981c11c48425b92a6afa9bce992e8@huawei.com> <CAO42Z2zpNunW=Chou+QDvOxd94r7WPqCdUg-3cODs9OCbiuGMg@mail.gmail.com> <3ed52b71-843c-1fd6-e7d5-c967d74cb97c@gmail.com> <1c44a648d0944a5ea5bc7a2ae37daabb@huawei.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <a0934026-2585-8c6e-aa54-cdb24714fa06@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2022 09:32:51 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1c44a648d0944a5ea5bc7a2ae37daabb@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/-d4y16B3QuMsJALxBvZ7kgg5xyk>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Thoughts about wider operational input
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2022 21:33:07 -0000

On 03-Apr-22 09:08, Xipengxiao wrote:
> Hi Brian,
> 
> As far as I know, ISPs have the power to move consumers/SOHOs to IPv6, but they don't have the power to move big enterprises to IPv6.  

Indeed not, but they have the power to make IPv4 more expensive than IPv6, or to convince their customers that IPv6 is more reliable.

    Brian


> Some big enterprises have moved to IPv6 on their own initiative.  For example, I know one of the big European super-market chains moved to IPv6 for the following reason:
> 
> *IPv4 address planning:*
> 
>   * Store: 1024 * 12000 stores= 12M. (500 addresses per Store is the real need)
>   * Warehouse: 64K * 180 warehouses= 11.52M
>   * Office campus: 64K * 100 campuses = 6.4M
> 
> *30M of IP addresses is required *(Reminder: 10/8 is just 16 million of 
addresses).
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: v6ops <v6ops-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Brian E Carpenter
> Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2022 10:53 PM
> To: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>; Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com>
> Cc: v6ops list <v6ops@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [v6ops] Thoughts about wider operational input
> 
> On 02-Apr-22 17:47, Mark Smith wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
>  > Even ISPs that deploy IPv6 are doing it for business and financial reasons. The two first hand instances I have experience with are (a) for marketing reasons around 10 years ago, because the company liked to consider itself a technology leader and (b) to save IPv4 CGNAT costs.
> 
> (b) seems to be why ISPs will progressively prefer to push mobile, domestic and SOHO users towards IPv6 and to box IPv4AAS into as small a corner as possible. But what will be the cost that causes ISPs to do the same for large enterprises?
> 
>      Brian
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> v6ops mailing list
> 
> v6ops@ietf.org <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
> 
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email