nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 and CDN's
From: Mark Tinka <mark@tinka.africa>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2021 19:19:51 +0200
On 10/22/21 18:08, tim () pelican org wrote:
I don't think it'll ever make money, but I think it will reduce costs. CGNAT boxes cost money, operating them costs money, dealing with the support fallout from them costs money. Especially in the residential space, where essentially if the customer calls you, ever, you just blew years' worth of margin.
The problem is accurately modelling cost reduction using native IPv6 in lieu of CG-NAT is hard when the folk that need convincing are the CFO's.
They are more used to "spend 1 to get 2". Convincing them to "save 2 by spending 1" - not as easy as one may think.
Mark.
Current thread:
- IPv6 and CDN's Marco Davids via NANOG (Oct 22)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Jens Link (Oct 22)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Marco Davids via NANOG (Oct 22)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Marco Davids via NANOG (Oct 22)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Lukas Tribus (Oct 22)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Marco Davids via NANOG (Oct 22)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Mark Tinka (Oct 22)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Matthew Walster (Oct 22)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Jens Link (Oct 22)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Job Snijders via NANOG (Oct 22)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Bryan Fields (Oct 22)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's tim () pelican org (Oct 22)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Mark Tinka (Oct 22)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Tom Hill (Oct 26)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Mark Tinka (Oct 22)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's David Conrad (Oct 23)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Fred Baker (Oct 23)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Christopher Morrow (Oct 23)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Fred Baker (Oct 23)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Bryan Fields (Oct 22)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's Bryan Fields (Oct 23)
- Re: IPv6 and CDN's David Conrad (Oct 26)
- Re: . (was IPv6 and CDN's) Bryan Fields (Oct 26)
- Re: . (was IPv6 and CDN's) John Curran (Oct 26)