Re: [v6ops] draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment

[Giuseppe Fioccola <[e-mail]>]

Hi,
Thank you for the inputs about this statement "For this reason, when IPv6 increases to a certain limit, it would be better to switch to the IPv6-only stage."
I agree that it is not very specific and we should extend the concept in this paragraph.
We can say that the "limit" can be "when IPv4 traffic is vanishingly small" or "when IPv6 increases to more than 90%", anyway it is difficult to be conclusive since it also depends on several factors.
As highlighted by Jordi, it should be considered on a case-by-case basis looking at the different strategies of the ISPs and at the different costs involved. 
We will surely explain and add more considerations on this point in the next revision of the draft.

Regards,

Giuseppe

-----Original Message-----
From: v6ops [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2021 10:16 PM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment


    But please consider that if an operator is already supporting its customers using classical dual stack or a solid solution like 6rd, there may be no good reason to change for the next ten years or more. Dual stack has no time limit.

-> Yes, agree, I was not trying to say that existing IPv6 deployments (with *any* transition mechanism) should move to IPv6-only with IPv4aaS. My sentence was thinking in "if you deploy IPv6 now".

    I think this statement in the draft:
    "For this reason, when IPv6 increases to a certain limit,
    it would be better to switch to the IPv6-only stage."
    is too vague to be useful. Switching costs might be very high, including loss of customers. In fact, the criterion for switching might be as simple as "when IPv4 traffic is vanishingly small."

-> Agree. I think it is a case-by-case basis. However, it should be considered that certain customers may need "real" dual-stack (example customer hosting dual-stack contents in their own premises), so one of the reasons may be releasing IPv4 addressers where they aren't longer "absolutely" needed, for other "better" usages, or even because the transfer of IPv4 addresses may cover the cost of moving to IPv6-only. Note also that IPv6-only with IPv4aaS has one more advantage for the ISP: you only manage a single stack, which means less opex, and this impacts more as less IPv4 traffic is there, and you don't need to "disable" IPv4, because it is "automatically" disabled. Instead using "real" dual-stack or older transition mechanisms, means that at some point in the future you may want to do a "new" transition to IPv6-only (which has a cost).



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.



_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops