cost of dual-stack vs cost of v6-only [Re: IPv6 on SOHO routers?]

Thu Mar 13 13:26:48 UTC 2008

On Wed, 12 Mar 2008, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> In a message written on Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 03:06:24PM -0500, Frank Bulk - iNAME wrote:
>> Furthermore, he stated that networking equipment companies like Cisco will
>> be moving away from IPv4 in 5 years or so.  This is the first time I've
>> heard this posited -- I had a hard believing that, but he claims it with
>> some authority.  Anyone hear anything like this?  My own opinion is that
>> we'll see dual-stack for at least a decade or two to come.
>
> ISP's are very good at one thing, driving out unnecessary cost.
> Running dual stack increases cost.  While I'm not sure about the 5
> year part, I'm sure ISP's will move to disable IPv4 support as soon
> as the market will let them as a cost saving measure.  Runing for
> "decades" dual stacked does not make a lot of economic sense for
> all involved.

So, can you elaborate why you think the cost of running dual stack is 
higher than the cost of spending time&money on beind on the bleeding 
edge to do v6-only yet supporting v4 for your existing and future 
customers still wedded to the older IP protocol?

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings