[colug-432] The end [of IPv4] is here, sort of

[Rick Troth]

What Roberto said: it's been happening for a while.
Things like NAT allowed us to put off dealing with the problem. (We're
talking twenty years of mass denial.)


On 07/03/2015 05:34 PM, Rick Hornsby wrote:
> A very large healthcare IT company I no longer work for said (more accurately, the scuttlebutt said) that they would not change to IPv6 in large part because of the complexity, but moreso because our clients (hospitals, etc) were refusing to move to IPv6.

The major consumer oriented internet services (eg: Google) enabled IPv6
"for real" three years ago. Comcast and TWC are serving residential IPv6
in many (most?) of their markets.


> It seems to me that widespread IPv6 adoption will only start to happen once it becomes significantly more expensive for orgs like my former employer to purchase IPv4 blocks than it does to change over.

It is already more expensive, but if they already hung out their shingle
on an IPv4 address (or block) then they don't feel the pain of getting
new IPv4 space.

I know some personally, and have observed others, who continue to refuse
to enable IPv6. The only legitimate reason is perceived cost (including
time), which is ironic and sad because IPv4 will soon cost more.


> It is also interesting to me that there doesn't seem to be anything (I saw) in EC2 where IPv6 was enabled out of the cloud box.  Everything is IPv4.  A quick Google search reveals little from Amazon itself, and the official word is that EC2 only supports IPv4 for VPC[1].  (Amazon is pushing everyone from classic toward VPC.)

I'm surprised EC2 doesn't talk IPv6. PMMAN does. So does Digital Ocean
(in their newer data centers).


> All this makes me more disappointed I won't be able to attend Jim's proposed talk[2].

There might be another IPv6 talk coming.

-- R; <><