| | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
You're here: Home |
Hi, On 17 Mar 2008, at 08:57, Akira Kato wrote:
1. Would you prefer: a. to use dual-stack on the same port/collision domain b. to have an entirely separate collision domain for v6 peeringI definitely prefer a. above, however, the situation might not be easy. NSPIXP-6, which is to be concluded on June 6th this year, has established in 1997 (sorry, the exact date is lost from my memory) for IPv6 only exchange. The IPv6 implementations on commercial routers were premature, and we expected many ISPs may "try" IPv6 with PC based router, which might not be preferred at the production IXs.
Using a dedicated IP6 router is also possible with option a. In other words, option b limits choice, option a does not.
[...]
But I don't think many of the ISP operators prefer "dual-stack". DIX-IE has allowed dual-stack operation for many years but only a small number of ISPs requested us the IPv6 addresses. The major problem here is that the operators do not like to reboot their routers with latest versions of software. Even if the router software do support IPv6, people seem to hasitate to turn the IPv6 functionality on.
Currently we have 110 IPv6 enabled routers connected to AMS-IX. Only eight are dedicated IPv6 routers, the other 102 are dual-stack. So to me it seems that dual-stack is preferred.
-- Arien
