nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 woes - RFC
From: Denys Fedoryshchenko <nuclearcat () nuclearcat com>
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 19:48:01 +0300
On 2021-09-19 09:20, Masataka Ohta wrote:
John Levine wrote:Unless their infrastructure runs significantly on hardware and software pre-2004 (unlikely), so does the cost of adding IPv6 to their content servers. Especially if they’re using a CDN such as Akamai.I wasn't talking about switches and routers.But, on routers, IPv6 costs four times more than IPv4 to look up routing table with TCAM or Patricia tree. It is not a problem yet, merely because full routing table of IPv6 is a lot smaller than that of IPv4, which means most small ISPs and multihomed sites do not support IPv6. Mark Andrews wrote:There is nothing at the protocol level stopping AT&T offering a similar level of service.Setting up reverse DNS lookup for 16B address is annoying, which may stop AT&T offering it.Don’t equate poor implementation with the protocol being broken.IPv6 is broken in several ways. One of the worst thing is its address length. Masataka Ohta
+1Different scope problem: on inexpensive software BRAS solutions (PPPoE/IPoE). Enabling ipv6 just jacked up neighbour table usage and lookups cost in benchmark profiling, because now it have to keep for all users IPv6 /64 + MAC entries. Another drop is neighbor discovery on device with 10k IPOE termination vlans and privacy extensions. Also, i wonder how this changed? https://blog.bimajority.org/2014/09/05/the-network-nightmare-that-ate-my-week/ Another problem is privacy extension and IoT, they are not supported in lwip stack shipped with most of IoT SoC. As far as i see in git it is not added yet too. And SLAAC vs DHCPv6, again, first lacking some critical features, and second is often not implemented properly.
As many say - this is tiny, a drops of mess and complexities, but the ocean is made up of tiny drops. All these little things lead to the fact that very few want to mess with v6.
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Owen DeLong via NANOG (Sep 25)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Baldur Norddahl (Sep 25)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Owen DeLong via NANOG (Sep 25)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Valdis Klētnieks (Sep 25)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC James R Cutler (Sep 25)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Andy Smith (Sep 25)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Chris Adams (Sep 25)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Masataka Ohta (Sep 26)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Jim Young via NANOG (Sep 26)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Nick Hilliard (Sep 26)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Denys Fedoryshchenko (Sep 22)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Tim Howe (Sep 18)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Tim Howe (Sep 18)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Bjørn Mork (Sep 08)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Saku Ytti (Sep 08)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Fred Baker (Sep 11)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Brian Johnson (Sep 12)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Randy Bush (Sep 12)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Owen DeLong via NANOG (Sep 12)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Randy Bush (Sep 12)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Michael Thomas (Sep 12)