Re: Carrier Grade NAT

[Corey Touchet <corey.touchet () corp totalserversolutions com>]

There¹s still a lot of websites that are not with the times.

No ipv6 on CNN, FOX, or NBC news websites.

Slashdot.org shame on you!


Comcast and AT&T work, but not Verizon.  No surprise there.  Power company
nope.


I think CGN is fine for 99% of customers out there.  Until the iPhone came
out Verizon Wireless had natted all their blackberry customers and saved
million¹s of IP¹s.  Then Apple and Google blew a hole into that plan.


Then again I¹m for IPv4 just running out and finally pushing people to
adopt.  The US Govt has done a better job of moving to IPv6 than private
industry which frankly is amazing all things considered.

Comcast is pushing over 1TBPS of IPv6 traffic, but I¹m sure that¹s mainly
video from Youtube and Netflix.




On 7/30/14, 9:45 AM, "Owen DeLong" <owen () delong com> wrote:

> The only actual residential data I can offer is my own. I am fully dual
> stack and about 40% of my traffic is IPv6. I am a netflix subscriber, but
> also an amazon prime member.
>
> I will say that if amazon would get off the dime and support IPv6, it
> would make a significant difference.
>
> Other than amazon and my financial institutions and Kaiser, living
> without IPv4 wouldn't actually pose a hardship as near as I can tell from
> my day without v4 experiment on June 6.
>
> I know Kaiser is working on it. Amazon apparently recently hired Yuri
> Rich to work on their issues. So that would leave my financial
> institutions. 
>
> I think we are probably less than 5 years from residential IPv4 becoming
> a service that carries a surcharge, if available.
>
> Owen
>
>
> > On Jul 29, 2014, at 22:42, Julien Goodwin <nanog () studio442 com au>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On 29/07/14 22:22, Owen DeLong wrote:
> > > > On Jul 29, 2014, at 4:13 PM, Mark Andrews <marka () isc org> wrote:
> > > > In message <20140729225352.GO7836 () hezmatt org>, Matt Palmer writes:
> > > > > > On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 09:28:53AM +1200, Tony Wicks wrote:
> > > > > > 2. IPv6 is nice (dual stack) but the internet without IPv4 is not a
> > > > > > viable
> > > > > > thing, perhaps one day, but certainly not today (I really hate
> > > > > > clueless
> > > > > > people who shout to the hills that IPv6 is the "solution" for
> > > > > > today's
> > > > > > internet access)
> > > > >
> > > > > Do you have IPv6 deployed and available to your entire customer
> > > > > base, so
> > > > > that those who want to use it can do so?  To my way of thinking,
> > > > > CGNAT is
> > > > > probably going to be the number one driver of IPv6 adoption amongst
> > > > > the
> > > > > broad customer base, *as long as their ISP provides it*.
> > > >
> > > > Add to that over half your traffic will switch to IPv6 as long as
> > > > the customer has a IPv6 capable CPE.  That's a lot less logging you
> > > > need to do from day 1.
> > >
> > > That would be nice, but I¹m not 100% convinced that it is true.
> > >
> > > Though it will be an increasing percentage over time.
> > >
> > > Definitely a good way of reducing the load on your CGN, with the
> > > additional benefit
> > > that your network is part of the solution rather than part of the
> > > problem.
> >
> > Being on the content provider side I don't know the actual percentages
> > in practice, but in the NANOG region you've got Google/Youtube, NetFlix,
> > Akamai & Facebook all having a significant amount of their services v6
> > native.
> >
> > I'd be very surprised if these four together weren't a majority of any
> > consumer-facing network's traffic in peak times.