[address-policy-wg] About the /22 allocation limitation

Hi,

On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 05:34:46PM +0200, Dpto. Datos Television Costa Blanca wrote:
> Im doing IPv6. IPv6 is not doing to me. I cant give a customer IPv6-only 
> access because he will only see 17.5% of the Internet(17.5% is the 
> number of ASN with IPv6, so to be realistic the percentage of IPv6 
> functioning networks are less).

IPv6 access with a NAT64 or with ds-lite is what other providers do that
do not have enough IPv4 addresses for their customer base.

Why do you think that your situation is different from that of the local
DSL ISP here in Munich, or the largest cable provider in Germany?  You
all do not have enough IPv4 addresses for all your customers - and there
will never be a way to *have* enough IPv4 addresses for the fast-growing
access ISPs, so workarounds need to be found.

For access ISPs, the workarounds (NAT64, ds-lite, MAP) are actually not 
all that bad - for content hosting, it's MUCH worse, as you really can't 
share a single IPv4 among multiple large content offerings (= not virtual 
systems hosted on the same server).

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444           USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 811 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20140415/9901341c/attachment.sig>