IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Thoughts about wider operational input

David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org> Sat, 02 April 2022 22:03 UTC

Return-Path: <drc@virtualized.org>
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 EC2A03A17EC for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:03:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.908
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=virtualized-org.20210112.gappssmtp.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 EtqeQryqEKY8 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:03:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl1-x62c.google.com (mail-pl1-x62c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62c]) (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 865DA3A17F1 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:03:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl1-x62c.google.com with SMTP id u12so3107226plg.10 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 02 Apr 2022 15:03:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=virtualized-org.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references :to; bh=g/DliVRZ5tRDwg3pvp4Qc+KPd8FHHDtUUkswvoms7og=; b=gai60rmLnkfS+mgzaFL/mdBsKyhtWN2A6iyPgwJ8uwp+Lrq78wdD/yEDCJgZ2IKQwW 3Ei4qGLyvRb2474cT3OU96zqS5Qv3s4Rhtzu8eeENUQkRCsHiudkZxKievUrt7z3Urkh +GbKvNkAq8v9GQAegfxSFWbHV2Kn854yXmb57aQxuHsNgjfZ3Xe5YbCOlSxScwQRyev/ 8gRUtsMjOXx3dpr/WMw6rkTtJyVXIOmd02CFKUUX2ZNrpkOl6eXrDoj7Q8tRVcKPWLDF Jb2M9lW2EwKJOqFOK76VbYyZ+QT/xCs8lwspB/q3FGk/iPVOqGvrMz0sXie4O8SFtN9k 3pQw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; bh=g/DliVRZ5tRDwg3pvp4Qc+KPd8FHHDtUUkswvoms7og=; b=6UMFfRIFDqSVys/BMRt5lAzfblkcaR1Y7Mvr7c9sstEMkJZ6G6Id/BtY1UAV0BZSgv 01g9Bane/7PWzeUrzZkAEfsXmBtQV30Dq2kZwbz/Z1wFGyz23HQVWH65cRqMl0f92D4m TBnIMI4I2c0Di1duKwnM8L2yr98+ilLsCNrtJTh5U0cOJKOYy4NcSkiWHlR/OGL0eHy1 GHZZbkF4dN0CPzpywVO3a2Ra63ob2A44HIiz6lpRnyxSxl4JHt5DNpoMtXPAl8YTEePf pIBIQWQUDy0WycWCMRMKY4+Skcp+QTNCr781OQklSCNX3bR8M+PU3RfC56ufZI28KFuM jrIg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532sexPXXO3/o8T5pzUCGsnQ07bL6r7ezSl1lWycSkQR+9Jnvsuc t2MWbk9Uj6QW3S49rebfNtOijSY+JahJDg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxeOXbyl+r7vQ5v3jzZSmNtE3MwMDbpjuejnFyrT/onJ2iFQa+x7+lduQorqrAnTN8r4+Vy6A==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:390c:b0:1c7:9a94:1797 with SMTP id ob12-20020a17090b390c00b001c79a941797mr18901390pjb.221.1648936981398; Sat, 02 Apr 2022 15:03:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([2600:1700:5135:f1f:88bc:dde5:36ac:7b3b]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k20-20020aa788d4000000b004fb07f819c1sm7184341pff.50.2022.04.02.15.03.00 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 02 Apr 2022 15:03:00 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_AFAC85A6-2EB7-43D0-A695-0D02DAC79450"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha256"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.80.82.1.1\))
From: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
In-Reply-To: <a0934026-2585-8c6e-aa54-cdb24714fa06@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2022 15:02:59 -0700
Cc: v6ops list <v6ops@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <3275AE52-81CA-404D-8A93-51157CBC3572@virtualized.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> <a0934026-2585-8c6e-aa54-cdb24714fa06@gmail.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.80.82.1.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/KZk190pnQErE1VTtpBAf_gLzJLo>
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 22:03:07 -0000

Brian

On Apr 2, 2022, at 2:32 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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,

Why would those ISPs want to push those (presumably) high-value customers over to competitors that aren’t uncharging for IPv4?

> or to convince their customers that IPv6 is more reliable.

Is it? I keep hearing IPv6 kit from vendors is yet to be feature complete in comparison to IPv4 and that IPv6 services by most content providers are generally viewed as an afterthought. Data (as opposed to theory) demonstrating IPv6 is more reliable would be helpful.

Regards,
-drc

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email