Hosting Related IPv6 Case Studies - Matt Ryanczak, ARIN Network Operations Manager | Part 2

Summary

The speaker discusses lessons learned in implementing IPv6, noting that native support is preferable to tunnels for easier troubleshooting and configuration. They highlight the variability in ISPs' handling of IPv6 and the importance of choosing one that provides reliable service. The speaker also touches on the advancements in IPv6 routing, the effectiveness of dual-stack configurations, and the utility of proxies like the Apache web server for transitioning legacy systems. Challenges with DHCPv6 support and reverse DNS are mentioned, along with the surprising compatibility of many open-source tools with IPv6. The speaker emphasizes the need to standardize on dual-stack and to require IPv6 support from vendors and in all new deployments.

Takeaways

• 📡 Tunnels are less desirable for native IPv6 connectivity due to complexities in troubleshooting MTU Discovery issues.
• 🌐 Not all ISPs handle IPv6 equally well, making it challenging to choose one without prior experience or recommendations.
• 🔄 Routing for IPv6 is not as reliable as IPv4, with the IPv6 routing table lagging behind IPv4, particularly in North America.
• 💾 Dual-stack implementation has proven to be stable and secure, contrary to initial concerns.
• 🛡️ Proxies, such as the Apache web server, are effective for transitioning legacy HTTP servers to support IPv6.
• 🔢 The use of 4-byte Autonomous System Numbers (ASNs) can lead to challenges in finding peers, highlighting the need for more entities to adopt this approach.
• 🔄 Native IPv6 support simplifies network configuration and troubleshooting compared to tunneling.
• 💻 DHCPv6 support is lacking in many operating systems, impacting the deployment of IPv6 in corporate networks.
• 🔍 Reverse DNS setup for IPv6 is cumbersome and not as straightforward as with IPv4, particularly for large networks.
• 💼 Windows XP has limited IPv6 support, notably lacking DNS over IPv6, but can be part of a dual-stack network with the right configurations.
• 🛠️ Vendor engagement is crucial for improving IPv6 support across various products and services.

Q & A

Why are tunnels considered less desirable for certain network operations?

Tunnels, while beneficial in many ways, can complicate troubleshooting for path MTU Discovery issues and may not be as reliable as native connections. This is because they introduce additional virtual interfaces, making it harder to diagnose problems compared to native interfaces.

What is the speaker's advice for choosing an ISP that provides good IPv6 support?

The speaker suggests asking friends or others who have experience with different ISPs to find out which ones provide reliable IPv6 service, as there's no clear way to know beforehand who does it well.

How has the routing for IPv6 improved over the years, according to the speaker?

The speaker notes that while IPv6 routing has improved significantly, it is still not as reliable as IPv4. They estimate that the IPv6 routing table is about eight to ten years behind the IPv4 routing table, particularly in North America.

What is the speaker's experience with dual-stack deployment?

The speaker has found dual-stack deployment to be effective and stable, contrary to initial fears about security issues or potential disruption of both IPv4 and IPv6 simultaneously.

Why does the speaker advocate for native IPv6 support over tunneling?

Native IPv6 support simplifies configuration and troubleshooting by not requiring additional tunnel interfaces, making network management more straightforward compared to tunneling.

What challenges does the speaker mention regarding DHCPv6 support?

The speaker points out that DHCPv6 is not well supported across all operating systems, with Windows 7 and Vista being exceptions. This lack of support affects how IPv6 is deployed within corporate networks.

How does the speaker address the issue of reverse DNS in IPv6?

Reverse DNS is described as a pain point in IPv6 deployment, especially for large networks, as it currently lacks the automated generation capabilities present in IPv4, and the speaker anticipates improvements in this area.

What is the speaker's stance on Windows XP's IPv6 capabilities?

While Windows XP is considered 'kind of broken' in terms of IPv6 support, it is still usable, particularly for dual-stack networks, as long as there are IPv4 name servers available for DNS lookups.

How does the speaker suggest engaging with vendors to improve IPv6 support?

The speaker recommends actively soliciting vendor support for IPv6 across various products. They have found that vendors are often interested in collaborating to achieve parity between IPv4 and IPv6, and this engagement can lead to product improvements.

What role does the Apache web server play in IPv6 transition according to the speaker?

The speaker highlights the Apache web server's ability to act as a proxy, which is beneficial for transitioning legacy HTTP servers and other devices that do not natively support IPv6.

What is the speaker's approach to IPv6 deployment in new applications and services?

The speaker's organization standardizes on dual-stack deployment and requires IPv6 support in all new applications and services. They also make IPv6 a requirement in all requests for proposals to vendors.