Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic WGLC

[Michael Newbery <[e-mail]>]

On 20/04/2011, at 11:18 AM, George, Wes E IV [NTK] wrote:
> [WEG] 5 letters... DDWRT. It shows as proof positive that there is a MUCH wider variety of hardware that CAN support IPv6 that
> DOESN'T due to a specific choice on the part of the OEM vendor. Yes, there are going to be some that actually can't, and "support"
> means different things on different hardware, but assuming that most of the ones that don't is due to hardware limitations is being
> quite generous. 

DDWRT runs on a relatively high end piece of equipment, namely a 802.11 router. There are a lot of plain old WAN-LAN routers though, especially in the xDSL world. It was to them that I was referring. I estimate that the majority of our xDSL customers have gateways that are incapable of being firmware upgraded to IPv6. Even if they have a DDWRT capable router at home that does them no good if the WAN/LAN router can't do IPv6 native.
 
Cable is slightly different, with the cable modem typically being (mostly) layer 2. I estimate that about 50% of our cable customers run some sort of RG and that the other 50% currently have a single PC directly connected. Of the 50% that have RGs, I would estimate that the majority are not capable of being firmware upgraded to IPv6 native. Fortunately, the 50% that have directly connected PCs *are* mostly capable, via an OS upgrade.

And lest anyone misunderstand, I am trying as hard as I can, as fast as I can, to roll out native IPv6 support. I consider tunnels a stopgap and LSN an ineffective abomination (to which I fortunately don't have to resort.)