jimmyblake at gmail.com
Thu Dec 10 15:03:06 UTC 2009
The work on v6 started when it looked like we would run out of v4 addresses, since then Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) brought us a good couple of decades of breathing space and the adoption of v6 suddenly became less urgent.
There are a couple of reasons that telcos have adopted v6 including that the duration of use of some telco equipment stretches into 8 - 10 years, so it makes sense for telcos to move to IPv6 in the core with v4 at the edges, so v6 will already be supported for consumer services in the core when the push out comes; also v6 offers extended capabilities over v4 that are useful to telcos such as Quality of Service at the Network Layer.
Consider BT's 21st Century Network (21CN) project, it is about moving all of BT services to being IP-based so you're not only talking about PCs connecting to the network but also every phone, fax and telex in the UK as well.
On 10 Dec 2009, at 14:48, Fish wrote:
> 2009/12/10 Colin McCarthy <binarysignal at gmail.com>:
>> I was always lead to believe that IPv6 would only ever be adopted by
>> telecoms providers and internet backbone people. Us regular home and
>> business users would not need it. Managing IPv6 is harder than IPv4 as
>> its not easily configurable by end users.
> Well, that's the thing. If the point of IPv6 was to get more
> addresses, what would be the point of that if only telecom providers
> used them? Unless the ISPs/telecom companies have more IP addresses
> than customers, then this doesn't make sense.
>> Just my expired CCNA opinion :-)
> Kent mailing list
> Kent at mailman.lug.org.uk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Kent