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

Netflix banning HE tunnels



Just to clarify - there's no transition involved - IPv4 to IPv6 is like
going from the VINES protocol to IPv6: IPv6 may as well have been called
"PROTOCOL 493" - it bares very little relation to the original protocol
that brought us the internet as-it-is-today.

The deployment of IPv4 had nothing to do with other protocols and neither
does IPv6 - EXCEPT for the fact that the use of the only
(largely-available) "transition" method (SixXS and HE.net tunnels) is now
coming face to face with media DRM, as media is taking over the internet.

Sooo....WTF batman?


On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 2:28 PM Ricky Beam <jfbeam at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 09 Jun 2016 23:57:08 -0400, Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> wrote:
>
> >>> zero interoperability, and no viable migration paths, it's a Forklift
> >>> Upgrade(tm).
> >>
> >> You say that with such confidence! Doesn't make it true.
> >
> > https://archive.psg.com/120206.nanog-v4-life-extension.pdf
> >
> > randy, who works for the first isp to deploy ipv6 to customers
>
> Also, the Randy who closed the ngtrans working group "declar[ing] victory"
> yet having produced nothing. Dual stack is not a transition plan, and
> never has been. It's a key factor in why we have such a fractured adoption
> today.
>
> If you've been completely ignoring IPv6 for 20 years, then it is indeed a
> steep learning curve[*]. If you haven't been upgrading equipment, shame on
> you! Otherwise, you've ended up with "IPv6 Capable(TM)" completely by
> accident, but you still have to deploy IPv6. On the scale of a large
> service provider (or enterprise, for that matter), that's not a trivial
> process. While *I* could upgrade the tiny island of the multi-national
> corp I work for [10 people, 1 (linux) router, 36 public facing networks]
> overnight via a plan drawn on the back of cocktail napkin over a long
> lunch, doing that over the entire global network is not going to happen
> overnight; the other offices have much more involved infrastructure.
>
> I'd like to hear from the Comcast's, TWC's, and Uverse's just how many
> man-hours were involved in the planning, testing, training, deployment,
> and troubleshooting of their IPv6 "transition". (I have a ppt of the
> Uverse 6rd plan. I cannot imagine that mere document was produced in lass
> than a day, not counting the data behind all those slides.)
>
> [*] As I joked with a business partner recently as he had to learn "all
> this crap about IPv6" for his CCIE recert, "you're a DoD contractor.
> They've had an 'IPv6 Mandate' for decades. I still have the memo." That
> mandate is for "IPv6 Capable"; they don't have any actual v6 anywhere.
>