Why not IPv6 yet (Re: IPv6 traffic data in Asian networks?)

[Gert Doering]

Hi,

On Sat, Mar 24, 2007 at 01:12:54PM +0000, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> I don't treat it as a toy part of the network.  As an IX operator, I'm 
> contractually bound to ensure that it works as well as ipv4 (which, 
> incidentally, is impossible given current C65k layer 2 support for v6).

Could you go into more detail on that?  My naive assumption is "an IXP
doesn't need to worry what sort of stuff is *in* the packets, as long
as there is enough L2 bandwidth available".

I know that this is not the full picture (MLD snooping issues at DECIX
come to mind), but as long as you leave IPv6 multicast [more than 
"link-local stuff"] out of the picture, I'm not aware of fundamental 
issues.

(And IPv6 "WAN" multicast is likely to be pushed to a separate Vlan
anyway, eventually, as is IPv4 multicast on most IXPs today).

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:  98999

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444            USt-IdNr.: DE813185279