Re: IPv6 for Websites

We've been told we have to prove that we are at 80% capacity of our current allocations to get new IPv4 space.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 28, 2012, at 8:11 AM, Aaron <aaron1_at_gvtc.com> wrote:

> Does ipv6 help in the case where an isp has a /17 (32k addresses) and an
> ever-increasing customer/subscriber base wanting a real-world routable
> address? Will ipv6 solve that problem where I will continue to have to
> issue out a publicly routable address to my customers and I only have an
> arin-assigned /17 but I need more and more addresses all the time? Today
> and in the foreseeable future, can I still get more arin-assigned ipv4
> prefixes if I request them and justify this with the aforementioned
> increasing subscriber base? Will arin give me more v4 space? Lemme
> know.... thanks
>
> Aaron
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Brian McGahan
> Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 10:33 PM
> To: Ryan West; Joseph L. Brunner
> Cc: Cisco Fanatic; ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: IPv6 for Websites
>
> What's interesting though is that IPv6 actually makes the problem worse, not
> better. The goal of IPv6 was to solve IPv4's address shortage and enforce
> heirarchy, but realistically heirarchy cannot be enforced. At this point
> the Internet is too highly and randomly interconnected for IPv6 to solve any
> real problem.
>
> The growth of the IPv4 BGP table is an indicator of why IPv6 won't solve the
> problem: http://bgp.potaroo.net/ Currently the IPv4 table is at over
> 450,000 prefixes and growing, which is over 100% growth over the past 4
> years. If you check the comparitive tables of IPv4 vs IPv6
> (http://bgp.potaroo.net/v6/v6rpt.html) right now ~60% of the IPv4 space is
> being advertised (~450,000 prefixes) and at ~10,000 prefixes IPv6
> advertising ~.02% of its space. What will happen when every end device
> actually enables IPv6 and needs to be globally routable? Not only will you
> *still* need to route the 500,000+ (conservatively) IPv4 prefixes at that
> time, but also the thousands or potentially millions of IPv6 prefixes in the
> table.
>
> I really hate to say this, but I think I have to agree with Joe on this one
> ;) IPv6 was defined in 1998 (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2460). That's
> almost 14 years it's been available and it has not ever been seriously
> implemented. I think long term IPv6 will be a pipe dream that never really
> took off and that some other protocol similar to LISP will be implemented to
> solve larger scale routing and mobility issues.
>
> Just don't email me a link to this post in 10 years when 99% of the Internet
> is running IPv6 and I was 100% wrong ;)
>
> Brian McGahan, CCIE #8593 (R&S/SP/Security) bmcgahan_at_INE.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of Ryan
> West
> Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 9:55 AM
> To: Joseph L. Brunner
> Cc: Cisco Fanatic; ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: IPv6 for Websites
>
> We might be, but a full BGP feed will take 8gb of RAM. Can't wait to see
> all those /26's in my table.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Sep 27, 2012, at 10:46 AM, "Joseph L. Brunner" <joe_at_affirmedsystems.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Your carrier needs to route IPv6 for you...
>>
>> Here's a hint: IPv6 was created to boost IT companies bottom line... its
> not needed, never was needed, never will be needed...
>>
>> 99% of companies (or more) use nat... entire clusters of home internet
> users can also use nat.
>>
>> The "Global IP Shortage" is a solution looking for a problem...
>>
>> Bet you $10 in 2020 we're all still using IPv4
>>
>> :)
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf
>> Of Cisco Fanatic
>> Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 10:29 AM
>> To: ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
>> Subject: IPv6 for Websites
>>
>> All -
>>
>> As IPv6 will be the future of Internet and I think I know much about IPv6
> as I am studying for my CCIE.
>>
>> I have a quick question and finding it very difficult to implement.
>>
>> My company is hosting 2 sites for a small company. This company approached
> and said that they want there sites to be IPv6 ready. We enabled IPv6
> protocol on the switches and Checkpoint firewall but it still does not work.
>>
>> Am I missing something or it is not that easy as I am thinking?
>>
>> Any help will be appreciated.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Yuri
>>
>>
>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>> _ Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>>
>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>> _ Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Fri Sep 28 2012 - 08:27:29 ART