4 ms·
This is a good case study, however it is worth to note that internet providers are among the ones getting something back from switching to IPv6.
by antirez 8y ago
This is a good case study, however it is worth to note that internet providers are among the ones getting something back from switching to IPv6.
- pbhjpbhj 8y agoWhat do they get back?
- toast0 8y agoIf you're using CGNAT to work around not having an IPv4 address for each user, then rolling out IPv6 reduces load on your CGNAT system to the extent that your users can and do move traffic to IPv6. Many popular sites support it, so there can be a pretty big shift.
- supertrope 8y agoNot having to buy IPv4 addresses. CG-NAT infrastructure expenses scale up with customer base. If most of their traffic is end to end IPv6 that's a savings. End point machines like cable modems, TV decoders, VoIP adapters/IP phones, all need their own IP address; service providers with more than 16.7 million managed devices attached need IPv6.
- pbhjpbhj 8y agoBut do the ongoing CGNAT expenses outweigh the potential expenses of transitioning? I'm with one of, if not the, largest UK ISP and am pretty sure they're not IPv6 ready because their routers have no mention of it (Huawei router firmware updates presumably needed). BT have upgraded the physical infrastructure so I'd expect we'd be there already if there were easy savings.
- leeter 8y agoLower network traffic (No DHCP and associated overhead), simpler routing (IPv6 is only CIDR). That may not seem like much but that's actually pretty huge to mobile carriers where that can translate into hours of battery life on the device and power costs at the node.
- danpalmer 8y agoBT aren't really big as a mobile carrier. I think they might offer business services for that, but they are most well known for their residential and business voice and broadband services.