IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Is there a problem? [was: Why enterprises aren't adopting IPv6]

Gert Doering <gert@space.net> Thu, 30 September 2021 20:35 UTC

Return-Path: <gert@space.net>
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 2E0E43A116A for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Sep 2021 13:35:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=space.net
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 tuvGBSXpA9oE for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Sep 2021 13:35:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gatekeeper1-relay.space.net (gatekeeper1-relay.space.net [IPv6:2001:608:3:85::38]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F1B03A1165 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Sep 2021 13:35:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=space.net; i=@space.net; q=dns/txt; s=esa; t=1633034121; x=1664570121; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=ClwLn9nLje10dVNl/1+ksRxrsCsxxZUX7FsBcjhXLQE=; b=fU7VRnLcN/XIJIm+3HiDCZDge3vnQyk+Ht6kydWtaUqK59Z6S013QNr5 5r7w5jvTshFZI/i46JZ5dembxso/hjpmK3vS6sssJZWuxsASPQosERguY PgUaLWx07i4qezYyPHg4evinGA+kVprEQh3+0opzlgND+v9y5iHx9Y86q clyF3kFaW9ymdB80aYIIe+2srcorHihfIizsH2wwMbuy2xHXSHawaV4zW kPc/dOTitGbiGWucXHnnTRXcbe/EYEFQYjftPhe7kDE5UzahvRpSMXBWe 58LVOx3dcZsms0aggj8GW2IKuDS4yl9DBQ9SfJMVzJ78RtzbPOI9+c5GI w==;
X-SpaceNet-SBRS: None
Received: from mobil.space.net ([195.30.115.67]) by gatekeeper1-relay.space.net with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 30 Sep 2021 22:35:16 +0200
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietf.org
Received: from mobil.space.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72B0C43D02 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Sep 2021 22:35:16 +0200 (CEST)
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
Received: from moebius4.space.net (moebius4.space.net [IPv6:2001:608:2:2::251]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 090324245B; Thu, 30 Sep 2021 22:35:16 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by moebius4.space.net (Postfix, from userid 1007) id 01E5F11CA6E; Thu, 30 Sep 2021 22:35:16 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2021 22:35:15 +0200
From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Cc: otroan@employees.org, Gert Doering <gert@space.net>, Jen Linkova <furry@google.com>, V6 Ops List <v6ops@ietf.org>, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Owen DeLong <owen=40delong.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Message-ID: <YVYfgzONVaDYaZKK@Space.Net>
References: <0B533C71-5DB0-410D-A5A3-7E8FD559F214@delong.com> <CAKD1Yr3NoYfNT7+OVJoCCdgdif6AHHw29tNCPttS=-NuRZKv3w@mail.gmail.com> <DM6PR02MB692426B0EEDDC2C4D78D8EC0C3A89@DM6PR02MB6924.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <CAKD1Yr25dtinLBeJpAuJ17NfLg7-ewM9QPvnXNuEJ8wiBQV9ig@mail.gmail.com> <CAO42Z2zqf=F6OTDK2e8cMYXdPgMZ=SgFJcn7BTKYGgcYsLT2iw@mail.gmail.com> <894BCFE9-0811-4AE6-9941-6183292E4431@delong.com> <7E8C5F52-596F-4CAB-89EB-B0D5BAF5F612@employees.org> <YVXvgS6GDX97sHOW@Space.Net> <4AF3C29B-4642-4173-A027-0AAAEE65C869@employees.org> <71a223dd-1f92-a397-0f26-7d6032377787@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="l4Qf9+/uPiNhiuti"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <71a223dd-1f92-a397-0f26-7d6032377787@gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/Pzs02fxilPnEijecr5dpeBOONmo>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Is there a problem? [was: Why enterprises aren't adopting IPv6]
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: Thu, 30 Sep 2021 20:35:26 -0000

Hi,

On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 08:32:42AM +1300, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> We designed for co-existence, despite calling it "transition".
> 
> We have co-existence, and no drop-dead date for IPv4.
> 
> Why is this a problem?

Co-existence means it's easy to avoid doing IPv6 at all, because everyone
else will (have to!) find a way to cope with such laziness.

Thus, DS-lite, CGN, NAT64, ...

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                      Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14        Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444         USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email