[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

"Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

I would guess that a lot of the access growth going forward is going to
be a lot of what I would term "incidental access".  More and more
devices and technology requires or supports Internet access.  So while a
lot of people may not ask for internet service that don't already have
it, it will be more of an enabling technology that allows them to do
other stuff that they are interested in.  My aunt could care less about
"the Internet" but she sure loves being able to turn on the heat at her
vacation home and monitor stuff there.  

For example, Joe Schmo may not care about web browsing but wants remote
video surveillance, power saving technologies from his power company,
smart appliances, and a car that calls in for service by itself.  In
education, consider that in the third world schools are finding it much
more cost effective to build a computer lab than to provide up to date
text books and libraries.  In that case, the economics are in favor of
technology adoption.

A lot of these will require Internet access and more importantly this
guy is going to get more and more device such that there will be an
explosion in address needs.  Since he is mobile with all this cool
stuff, NATing it all is going to get ugly fast.  IPv6 might really be a
good idea to new build outs since some of the most difficult issues are
with transition strategies and devices consumers will have to configure.
I think my life would be much easier if I were to deploy IPv6 from day
1.  Cell phones that can be auto configured or embedded devices that the
consumer does not have to deal with are the best places to put IPv6.

This is a lot like fiber deployment.  I put a lot of fiber into
countries that did not have good wire line infrastructure.  It was
cheaper, easier to maintain, and was not as marketable on the black
market as copper is.  Some of the last countries to get technology have
the best infrastructure now because they started with the last
generation of stuff.  It is a lot harder to justify replacement of old
tech than a Greenfield installation.

Steven Naslund

-----Original Message-----
From: Dobbins, Roland [mailto:rdobbins at arbor.net] 
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 5:01 PM
To: NANOG list
Subject: Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not
have IPv6 in their applications"....

On Nov 29, 2012, at 12:27 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:

> 60% of the world's population still isn't on the internet and I expect
a significant fraction of that will be coming on in the next 2-4 years.

I live and work in a part of the world which contains a sizable subset
of that 60% - i.e., Asia.

I see just about zero IPv6 awareness, much less deployment, except
peripherally in Japan and, to an even lesser degree, the RoK.

I see so many other challenges facing so many IPv4 networks in this
region that it's inconceivable that they would be deploying IPv6 within
the next 2-4 years, or even the foreseeable future.

Also, it appears to me that a large proportion of the population in this
region who have both a sufficient amount of disposable income (it
doesn't require much here, especially via mobile wireless, but it's
still more than a lot of people have) and a corresponding degree of
interest to obtain and benefit from Internet access, and who are in fact
likely to ever get Internet access, already have it.  So, I'm not so
sure that there are still these vast numbers of underserved yet eager
potential Internet users out there, as is commonly mooted.

Roland Dobbins <rdobbins at arbor.net> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com>

	  Luck is the residue of opportunity and design.

		       -- John Milton