4 ms·

> Is global routing really the problem in 2023? I don't think so, why? I was talking about migrating from v4 on the day 0, when every single ip-speaking device

by allarm 3y ago

> Is global routing really the problem in 2023? I don't think so, why? I was talking about migrating from v4 on the day 0, when every single ip-speaking device used v4 only. My point was that on day 0 the main problem was global routing, because the new protocol should have got hardware support and all the network equipment should have been replaced. Local networks migration is much easier to do. > Do you know of any networks which are still on IPv4? I managed networks for around 15 years, up until 2018 and I've never managed an IPv6 network in my whole career. My current company (a well-known company from SF) runs v4 only network. I think the question should be different: what is the motivation for sysadmins and the business to migrate to v6, if v4 runs perfectly fine? And the answer is - there's basically none.

theamk 3y ago
Oh, I don't think "day 0" migration would ever be possible.. but with less breaking changes it could have taken 10 or 15 years instead 30+. And then no one would care about IPv4 shortages anymore for example. The companies change stuff all the time - there is new software, there are new protocols, new hardware. For example, I remember setting up QoS/DSCP once because I _thought_ it might help with ssh sessions (it didn't). My current company routinely has cleanup/general improvement projects, to both improve network and keep network engineers happier. And given the amount of noise about IP shortage, we'd definitely consider IPv6 migration _if it only wasn't so damn expensive, time-wise_.
- Dagger2 3y ago
  That might well be true! It just doesn't seem to be possible. There's no point wishing for fewer breaking changes when the one thing you're doing all of this for -- longer addresses -- is the thing causing the breakage. I don't think any of your IP-long suggestions would reduce the time you needed to deploy v6. If you disagree... perhaps v6 wouldn't actually take you as much time to deploy as you're imagining it will.

by allarm 3y ago

theamk 3y ago

Oh, I don't think "day 0" migration would ever be possible.. but with less breaking changes it could have taken 10 or 15 years instead 30+. And then no one would care about IPv4 shortages anymore for example. The companies change stuff all the time - there is new software, there are new protocols, new hardware. For example, I remember setting up QoS/DSCP once because I _thought_ it might help with ssh sessions (it didn't). My current company routinely has cleanup/general improvement projects, to both improve network and keep network engineers happier. And given the amount of noise about IP shortage, we'd definitely consider IPv6 migration _if it only wasn't so damn expensive, time-wise_.

Dagger2 3y ago
That might well be true! It just doesn't seem to be possible. There's no point wishing for fewer breaking changes when the one thing you're doing all of this for -- longer addresses -- is the thing causing the breakage. I don't think any of your IP-long suggestions would reduce the time you needed to deploy v6. If you disagree... perhaps v6 wouldn't actually take you as much time to deploy as you're imagining it will.