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

[Ole Troan]

Gert,

>>>> So, any thoughts on this topic, and any qualified guesses on when we no longer need to do IPv4 and still be able to call our internet product premium?
>> 
>> When will IPv6 provide me as an end-user with more "value" than what my current NATed IPv4 connection does?
> 
> Today!
> 
> (I'm hearing more and more reports that the CGNs deployed by big german
> cable ISPs are breaking SIP and IPSEC to IPv4-only targets for their
> customers...)

But that's "better value" by making IPv4 work less good. and I'll postulate that we can make A+P / shared IPv4 work good enough that end-users who are trained to live behind a NATs will not notice.

For me I would get added value when I could deploy IPv6 only services at home, e.g. mail, XMPP, web, SIP... VPN.
And I could reach my own home whenever I'm travelling.

With a devil's advocate hat on, IPv6 in my home right now gives me slightly more hassle than it is worth.
The only value is that I am able to reach my IPv6 only mail server from work and at IETFs, but that's pretty much it.

I can't do IPv4 as a service either (like relegate IPv4 to the edge of the network and run IPv6 only inside), because there are too many IPv4 only devices.

When's that going to change?
50% deployment? 90% deployment?

cheers,
Ole
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 496 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <https://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/attachments/20150212/aeb6b50f/attachment.sig>