[members-discuss] Interesting IP count

Hi Job

On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 1:19 AM, Job Snijders <job at instituut.net> wrote:
> Hi Lu Heng,
>
> On 5 jun. 2012, at 01:03, Lu Heng wrote:
>
>> Second I want to make perfect clear that I have no doubts about how
>> serious IPv6 is, and how urgent we need to do it.
>
> :-)
>
>> But Job you are perfectly right, this topic most of us has come over
>> multiple times, and I am sorry to bring this up again.
>
> No, do not feel sorry, IP economics change over time. Especially given that
> World IPv6 Laundry day is around the corner, it's worth discussing.
>
Thanks:)
>> As I have been to Asian a lot, which is the first region out of IP
>> spaces, but I find out most of my Chinese colleagues have never
>> worried about IP issues.
>> Even China telecom are charging over 10USD/month/IP, most ISP are just
>> ok with it.
>> because end of the day, 10USD/month isn't a lot for enterprise customer.
>
> You are talking about _today_ I assume. I think at some point the cost of
> maintaining IPv4 space will be higher than just deploying IPv6 on the
> devices that talk to other continents.

No, what I mean here is, the real economically pressure that at least
from my experiences with current enterprise customer, they don't
really have any, because IP has been THE most profitable thing for
almost all major commercial ISPs, look at this way, we get IP for
free, and we sell it at what, 10,20,50 even sometime 100USD per year
per IP.

If we looking at the real rate the enterprise customer are paying for
today, it is not really much of hurry for them to rush for the IPv6 at
all--they paying this costs for years anyway.

The video you have showed, randy was perfect right in the video, one
day, we will hit a wall that will make our IPv4 costs so high that we
have to go IPv6, but the question is, when?

We know we are going to running out of IP address 20 years ago, but
look at today's market you will find out that not many people are even
heard of IPv6, it always be an "new and interesting and far future"
thing.
>
>> NAT has limited functionality, yes, but for most cable network users,
>> that functionality is enough for them.
>
> Might be true, but I like a world where everybody can run any service
> on their IP addresses without jumping through NAT hoops.

We are jumping though NAT hoops already these days, look at Chinese
market, the largest internet user base, they are living an happy life
with their carrier NAT for years.

And another thing is, US are wasting enormous amount of IPs nowadays,
they have less user base then China, but they are using about 10 times
more than China, if we can make US use their IPs more effectively, in
which I  it might be as the market price come into play, the intention
of re-writing software to support v6 might be well delayed for
sometime.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Job
>



-- 
--
Kind regards.
Lu

This transmission is intended solely for the addressee(s) shown above.
It may contain information that is privileged, confidential or
otherwise protected from disclosure. Any review, dissemination or use
of this transmission or its contents by persons other than the
intended addressee(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this transmission in error, please notify this office immediately and
e-mail the original at the sender's address above by replying to this
message and including the text of the transmission received.