Re: [v6ops] Operational Consensus on deployment

[James Woodyatt <[e-mail]>]

I think about this a little differently.

I contend the incentive for customers to upgrade will happen when "have you
tried disabling IPv4?" and "do you have IPv6?" are the responses you start
seeing in troubleshooting forums in response to questions in the category
"Why is $APPLICATION not working / too slow / so unstable?"


On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Owen DeLong <[e-mail]> wrote:

> The incentive for customers to upgrade will start to happen when ISPs
> start sending out notices to the following effect:
>
> ————————
>
> Due to the aging nature of the IPv4 protocol and the increased costs of
> continuing to support customers on this protocol,
> we will have to start adding an IPv4 surcharge to your bill if you wish to
> continue IPv4 service.
>
> We recognize that today, many customers will consider IPv4 still an
> essential service. Unfortunately, several content providers,
> such as Amazon, Twitter, Bing, Wordpress, etc. still haven’t joined the
> modern internet by upgrading to IPv6.
>
> However, we do not feel that it is fair to penalize customers who no
> longer need IPv4 by asking them to share the costs of
> continuing to support this aging protocol, so, for those customers that
> do, we will begin adding $5/month to your bill effective
> <date>
>
> ————————
>
> (Or something like it)
>
> I believe this will happen sooner than many people think.
>
> Owen
>
> On Aug 19, 2014, at 5:33 PM, Mark Andrews <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> >
> > In message
> <[e-mail].C
> > O.UK>, "Heatley, Nick" writes:
> >> If I may stick my neck out.
> >>
> >> Id like v6ops to consider at least two items:
> >>
> >> 1.       (Carrier Grade) NAT64 vs NAT44  a deathmatch.
> >
> >       Most of the problem with NAT64 vs NAT44 is getting CPE
> >       devices upgraded.  464xlate worked for cellular networks
> >       because the devices were replaced to support 4G services
> >       and those new devices support 464xlate.  Additionally cell
> >       phones are fragile devices that get stolen, lost, dropped,
> >       stepped on, driven over, and is some market need to be
> >       replaced to change carrier ... so there is a high turnover.
> >
> >       For wired connections there is no incentive for the customer
> >       to replace the CPE device so NAT44 is a required part of
> >       the solution space just to share the limited IPv4 address
> >       space between the IPv4 only customers.  Cable and DSL modems
> >       work for 10+ years.  Home routers work for similar lengths
> >       of time.  You can still buy IPv4 only routers and they are
> >       cheaper than anything with IPv6 in it.  If you are on a
> >       limited budget a IPv4 only router with 802.11g "will do".
> >
> >       Add to that ISP's not offering / promoting IPv6 there is
> >       no incentive for the customer to buy the IPv6 capable device
> >       over the IPv4 only one.  The choice of device is made on
> >       other factors.  If ISPs offered to do 2G of IPv6 data for
> >       the price of 1G of IPv4 data one might actually get customers
> >       to buy IPv6 capable routers.  A 12 month rebate for installing
> >       a IPv6 capable CPE device could offset the costs of installing
> >       more CGNAT boxes.  IPv6 capable 802.11n routers can be got
> >       for AUD80 today.  Even on a AUD$20 plan the rebates would
> >       cover the costs if the usual +50% taffic shift to IPv6
> >       occurs.
> >
> >       Mark
> > --
> > Mark Andrews, ISC
> > 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
> > PHONE: [phone]                 INTERNET: [e-mail]
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > v6ops mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>