Re: [RRG] 2 billion IP cellphones in 2103 & mass adoption of IPv6 by currentIPv4 users

[Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@cisco.com>]

On Sep 17, 2008, at 7:01 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:

> If this is true, and it sounds plausible, and if this $ 200 billion  
> industry (2 billion x $ 100 per) needs IPv6 and a new routing  
> mechanism, why isn't this list flooded by cell-phone engineers ?
Mobile operators, in many cases, appear in many cases to be slow to  
acknowledge that they are in fact SPs, and that their networks must be  
designed and operated as SP networks, even when they explicitly and  
aggressively market services like 3G connectivity for laptops/mobiles  
(as I'm typing this message, I'm sitting on a ferry, connected via an  
HSDPA USB adaptor to a wireless carrier's network).  I've personally  
held conversations with the senior technical management of multiple  
mobile operators wherein I pointed out to them that they were access  
SPs and ought to design/operate their networks as such, and they  
vehemently denied this, despite their aggressive marketing of GPRS/ 
EDGE/3G connectivity services, until I finally whipped out my mobile  
phone and started accessing Web sites and sending/receiving IMs over  
their respective networks in order to make the point in an irrefutable  
manner.
The result has invariably been a sort of chagrined epiphany, followed  
by varying degrees of bemusement, dismay, and incipient panic.
> Do they believe in magic ?
It would almost appear that way, in some cases, heh.

> Do they just don't know the IETF & IRTF exist ?
Oftentimes, only a few people within the mobile operator organization  
seem to really know about and understand IP, and very few of them  
participate in IETF/IRTF and/or other non-mobile standards bodies or  
industry conclaves (there are exceptions, of course, and awareness/ 
engagement seems to be increasing, over time).  In many cases, their  
IP-based networks appear to've have grown organically, without much in  
the way of conscious design and planning; once their higher-speed IP- 
based connectivity services start to receive significant uptake,  
there's a lot of concern and scrambling around to increase capacity,  
resiliency, redundancy, et. al.
In some ways, what's happening in the mobile broadband space seems to  
faithfully echo the various trends, challenges, and reactions which  
have taken place in the wireline broadband space, but compressed  
greatly in time due to the rapid uptake of such services and the even  
higher initial oversubscription ratios in the wireless spac
> Or do they have other plans ?
There's a lot of NATting going on in this space, and an active desire  
on the part of management to provide the minimum of 'true' IP  
connectivity which users will accept and pay for, due to fears of  
service bypass, the desire to keep the user in a 'walled garden' of  
metered services, oversubscription concerns, etc.  The service terms  
for many wireless services often explicitly forbid the use of P2P  
technologies like BitTorrent, and in some cases ftp and other  
protocols/services which are viewed as being undesirable due to  
typically heavy usage patterns.
Note that the handset manufacturers are very responsive to carrier  
requirements in terms of the capabilities that they design into the  
handsets, even in markets where unlocked, individually-purchased  
mobiles are the norm.  AFAIK, none of even the most modern smartphones  
support IPv6, or allow it to be enabled by the user (correction  
welcome); which is rather ironic, given that, at present, IPv6-based  
mobile networks would represent a garden with especially high walls.
Also, I've yet to see a wireless access service which supports IPv6  
even for general-purpose computers connected via wireless adaptors.   
None of the mobile network operators with whom I've interacted provide  
IPv6 connectivity at all, or have disclosed an intention to do so in  
the near-to-medium-term future.
As to long-range plans, my subjective impression is that most of the  
mobile operators to whom I've spoken are just now coming to grips with  
the implications and requirements of operating production-quality IPv4  
networks, and IPv6, even though it would at first blush seem quite  
attractive to them, is in many cases not even on their radar.  I'm  
sure this will change over time, but quite slowly, given the industry  
characteristics noted above.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@cisco.com> // +852.9133.2844 mobile

     History is a great teacher, but it also lies with impunity.

                   -- John Robb


--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg