According to https://twitter.com/Benjojo12/status/1452673637606166536 Cogent<->Google IPv6 now works. A cake is in order, but perhaps a celebratory one!?
There aren't enough folk thinking along these lines, so thank you for
writing it.
Every flow you can route exclusively with 6, is one flow you aren't
having to pay extra for so it can sit in a CGNAT state table.
... And that's before they call you, as Tim also rightly points out.
It appears that Bryan Fields <Bryan@bryanfields.net> said:
Can you explain how it would work? Say you have a root server operator who
starts messing up, is there any ability to remove them?
Nope. We are fortunate that for over 30 years the root servers have all been
competent and reliable.
It’s a hard question, but it isn't the folks at IANA who answer it.
Who does? Doesn't IANA designate root servers and the . zone?
The root servers are basically the people who have always run the root servers,
give or take a few changes due to mergers and a few additions over a decade ago
to get better geographic diversity.
R's,
John
You might look at https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/rssac-037-15jun18-en.pdf. Yes, there is a proposed way to remove an operator that is not working out.
Implementing IPv6 reduces costs for CGNAT. You will have (twice?) less traffic flow through CGNAT, so cheaper hardware and less IPv4 address space. Isn't it?
22.10.21 20:19, Mark Tinka пише:
How to express that in numbers CFO can take to the bank?
Mark.
With a kicking ass pitch
"want to buy 5 of those shiny new CGNAT boxes or only 2 ?"
Frank
Well … YMMV. We’ve been running v6 for years, and it didn’t really make a dent in spend or boxes or rate of v4 depletion. Big part of the problem in our neck of the woods is millions of v4-only terminals … as well as large customer/gov bids requiring tons of v4 address space.
Care to explain because the alternative seems pretty self-evident.
Here are some maths and 1 argument kicking ass pitch for CFO’s that use iphones.
Apple tells app devs to use IPv6 as it’s 1.4 times faster than IPv4
https://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-tells-app-devs-to-use-ipv6-as-its-1-4-times-faster-than-ipv4/
Build around that maybe?
Jean
With that specific line directly from Apple:
“And when IPv6 is in use, the median connection setup is 1.4 times faster than IPv4. This is primarily due to reduced NAT usage and improved routing.”
There it is, Improved routing.
Jean
This really hits my bs meter big time. I can't see how nat'ing is going to cause a 40% performance hit during connections. The article also mentions http2 (and later v3) which definitely make big improvements so I'm suspecting that the author is conflating them.
Mike
Here are some maths and 1 argument kicking ass pitch for CFO’s that use iphones.
Apple tells app devs to use IPv6 as it’s 1.4 times faster than IPv4
https://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-tells-app-devs-to-use-ipv6-as-its-1-4-times-faster-than-ipv4/
Build around that maybe?
This really hits my bs meter big time. I can’t see how nat’ing is going to cause a 40% performance hit during connections. The article also mentions http2 (and later v3) which definitely make big improvements so I’m suspecting that the author is conflating them.
Mike
Ok, take the same ipv6 is faster claim from facebook
https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2015/04/facebook-news-feeds-load-20-40-faster-over-ipv6/
Still really thin with details of why. At least this says that they are NAT'ing v4 at *their* edge. But 99% of the lag of filling your newsfeed is their backend and transport, not connection times so who knows what they are actually measuring. Most NAT'ing is done at the consumer end by your home router in any case.
Mike
We now have apple and fb saying ipv6 is faster than ipv4.
If we can onboard Amazon, Netflix, Google and some others, then it is a done deal that ipv6 is indeed faster than ipv4.
Hence, an easy argument to tell your CFO that you need IPv6 for your CDN.
Xmas is coming so the budget season. Who knows. You might get lucky this year.
Netflix is already v6 ready. The biggest obstacle is probably aws because that's where a lot of the long tail of the internet resides. Lobbying them would get the most bang for the buck.
Mike
AWS has been gradually improving support and adding features. They just announced this service, which might help with adoption:
https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2021/11/aws-nat64-dns64-communication-ipv6-ipv4-services/
AWS has been gradually improving support and adding features. They just announced this service, which might help with adoption:
AWS launches NAT64 and DNS64 capabilities to enable communication between IPv6 and IPv4 services
That's a start, I guess. Before all they had was some weird VPN something or other. Let me guess though: they are monetizing their market failure.
Mike
But CFOs like monetization. Was that thread about IPv6 or CFO?