Why do we still need IPv4 when we are migrating to IPv6...

Anfinsen, Ragnar Ragnar.Anfinsen at altibox.no
Mon Feb 16 08:58:41 CET 2015

On 14.02.15, 19.39, "Erik Kline" <ek at google.com> wrote:

>> From our perspective, doing investments on CGN/AFTR technology now can 
>>almost be comparable with buying address, as we must consider 
>>deprecation on the equipment anyways. If we can wait a bit longer and 
>>the IPv4 traffic lowers to for example 10% and then do the CGN /AFTER 
>>investment, it would possibly be cheaper and possibly be done with 
>>equipment we already have. I guess seen from a pure economics 
>>perspective it does not make much difference, but at least we can uphold 
>>the native IPv4 until the majority of ISP's and content providers are 
>>fully Dual-Stacked.
>What does "IPv4 traffic lowers to...10%" mean here?
>Is this 10% meant to suggest that you'll wait until 90% of the
>Internet has IPv6, or when the average dualstack user's traffic mix
>will reach 90% IPv6 to 10% IPv4?

The latter, apologies for being unclear... :)

More information about the ipv6-ops mailing list