IPv6–The Cyclical Discussion

I think everyone knows (or should know) that IP version 4 is on its way out. The real question is when it will happen. Moreover, when will IPv6 become mainstream, reach a tipping point, and render IPv4 less relevant. This entire process will take many years and there are parts of the world that are far beyond the US in the density of their deployment.

The thing that I really find odd is the cyclical nature around the discussion of IPv6. At least two times in the last two years, I have spent quite a bit of time understanding and labbing IPv6. This seemed to be spawned from a lot of discussion in the blogosphere. After labbing and learning, I’d walk away and do very little real world work with it.

Recently, I’ve been hearing about v6 again. Within the last few weeks, I’ve had inquiries and read several blogs about IPv6. Once again, I’ll probably start spending some lab time with it again. My question is this, “Why is the discussion itself cyclical?” Let’s get this protocol up and going. Clean network designs without the complexities of NAT sounds like a great place to me.

No related content found.

About Paul Stewart, CCIE 26009 (Security)

Paul is a Network and Security Engineer, Trainer and Blogger who enjoys understanding how things really work. With over 15 years of experience in the technology industry, Paul has helped many organizations build, maintain and secure their networks and systems.
This entry was posted in Other. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to IPv6–The Cyclical Discussion

  1. negativeindex says:

    If you are going to deploy dual stacked, you will still need nat in cases where you need rfc1918 space. Pure v6 not so much but I don’t see many situations where that is useful.

    • Paul Stewart says:

      Very true. So simplification only comes from the IPv6 stack. Holistically, we now have to deal with a dual stack environment (and NAT remains in the v4 side of things).

Comments are closed.