I’ve been told by very smart people that IPv6 is amazing and should be implemented everywhere. I’ve also been told by other really smart people that there’s no reason to implement it at all. I’ve also been told by slightly fewer smart people that it’s stupid and we shouldn’t support it. Those fewer smart people are the ones in charge. Because of them, there is no IPv6 support on our entire network. We even have policy to disable IPv6 kernel modules and AAAA record lookups.
Our WAN supports IPv6. Our equipment supports IPv6. We have our IPv4 /29, but we need more IPs. v6 seems like a perfect solution.
I feel like there’s something critical I’m missing. I understand the absolute basics of IPv6, but I’ve never seen an actual IPv6 network implemented anywhere I’ve worked. NAT and small address spaces has always been the preferred network.
Besides the gargantuan increase in address space, and the lack of need for NAT, there doesn’t seem to be much different between the two. The cost for a v6 block is low, and it would solve multiple problems we have.
Is there something IPv6 is doing that validates this concern, or is it just ‘I don’t know it so it’s bad’ mentality?
I can’t think of anything except more extensive IP blacklists, some minor performance hits on our hardware devices, and the labor needed to switch over or Dual-Stack.
No comments:
Post a Comment