IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Thoughts about wider operational input

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Sat, 02 April 2022 23:51 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 243313A1861 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Apr 2022 16:51:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.11
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.11 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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=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 gl0C1WnlmipS for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Apr 2022 16:51:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pj1-x1032.google.com (mail-pj1-x1032.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1032]) (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 B08723A1308 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 2 Apr 2022 16:51:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pj1-x1032.google.com with SMTP id bx5so5451495pjb.3 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 02 Apr 2022 16:51:45 -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=0Nl5VYKFQ4sfVT7HIPFHgxfXabCpz2YAqrtHMHTVqsY=; b=qFRtqIn4R7ysdZ6d14yUpW3DP1GSSr6xnTpKwBcclss0u9RUz+vK2UXCrzaaSScVql qKep6CT9SRgxiykpubgdm6Md1AmTEvZ8M23+LuxEISbqFBYYd5dm9ciwNGla+lLKl24f PYDIr8+5rrH8aDU0ot8gEfZt9nmGlng02fF05FLaO9flKmtPuQmY5X2ptGwV69z99yWt hsgM0OM72eQvFgKsOMaljX6mHoKH79D9zBvVIvyaqjK+ijYmaGOBbcOcYYivSIfe3SEO t52odVDVmrQPlSlSk1pSvG7ywmFGhKUSobwNjQoaeRS2iK1BwqUnOn5hgC8cF525uTrs KEFQ==
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=0Nl5VYKFQ4sfVT7HIPFHgxfXabCpz2YAqrtHMHTVqsY=; b=1lWm2AVKeqDxP/zbynwF/krdUgf3qkg/uxx7UOCyMF26CuSi6O8tEGa+JC+476sXnK LZYQKeo50HVeox6sDbBC+9mr53QN9iGsM1TWRA3PyYuN76jZ4TTcuJhHmpRSuOE3mXH8 F5HK+/LfowWYmf0oWzqSTzEphfKQzBVyu12bG+W6ZGwjL61tAKpHE3zaxGf+GjvK2LYf vG+BzQM2UWBEN/yxjDYCFaHjg85/YDus3xtvnUYWgVRi3s22bl/VfU/Os9LRQV3YrLDE 7MljAccRsakcZamLtsvFD/gYmhYAm42dipXVuf7LnclIsxqshgF8I+CkuKucsKw5Is7I lHTg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530sk3mw+Rsa/JXAPtf7NLf8smi5kPDfxngSjRTTiyKwyF4UvkHp PH47s1KMiVw6HERHWXX9+z3CKFNDcLhL2A==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxjOlVsJX2oYz2J1D4hbQnlRavcuCqFXrGDw89BzEoQ5KqY0LBEnrHxJ15Fy8bFAvTBLSgHOQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:728f:b0:156:24d3:ae1a with SMTP id d15-20020a170902728f00b0015624d3ae1amr27806915pll.9.1648943504635; Sat, 02 Apr 2022 16:51:44 -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 m1-20020a637d41000000b00398da17dcffsm6199597pgn.58.2022.04.02.16.51.43 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 02 Apr 2022 16:51:44 -0700 (PDT)
To: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
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> <a0934026-2585-8c6e-aa54-cdb24714fa06@gmail.com> <3275AE52-81CA-404D-8A93-51157CBC3572@virtualized.org>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3a9073b3-0e1a-5c4d-dceb-c34d69889de1@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2022 11:51:39 +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: <3275AE52-81CA-404D-8A93-51157CBC3572@virtualized.org>
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/M1qYkLkK2Eu4Nuu2AQ41Rb-NQec>
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 23:51:48 -0000

Dave,
On 03-Apr-22 10:02, David Conrad wrote:
> 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?

Sure, this incentive would only become real if the cost difference itself 
was real and exceeded the switching costs.

> 
>> 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.

Yes. My argument is that if became true, it would be an incentive.

     Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email