IP4 Space

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Fri Mar 26 17:31:33 UTC 2010


On Mar 26, 2010, at 8:57 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:

> On Wednesday 10 March 2010 09:46:19 pm Jim Burwell wrote:
>> On 3/10/2010 16:57, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>> The target really needs to be the CxOs and the management,
>>> especially in places where there is content facing the general
>>> public.  Fortunately, Google, Yahoo, Netflix, etc. get it and have
>>> moved forward with IPv6. Some others are coming along.
>
>> True.  CxOs can basically order it to be done.
>
> Fascinating thread; thanks to all for the many insights found here;  
> this
> thread has made my personal archive, just like the other long one  
> did.  I've
> chosen to reply to this post, because it directly addresses me, in  
> addition to
> the other two topical posts I just couldn't resist.
>
> So, let me give the insight from the CIO point of view, at least in  
> terms of a
> non-profit organization.  How do I know this PoV?  I _am_ the CIO  
> here, that's
> how.  Here's my hypothetical reaction to a hypothetical network  
> engineer
> coming to me with a good, solid, thorough, and compelling  
> presentation on why
> we need to go to IPv6:
>
> "Hey, great presentation.  Compelling arguments.  But I have one  
> question:
> will our existing gear that's not yet fully depreciated handle it?   
> No? Sorry,
> won't happen.  Not in this recession year; grants have been tight,  
> and nobody
> wants to fund this kind of capex right now.  Especially not since it  
> hasn't
> yet been five years since that previous grant bought some of that  
> equipment.
> No, we cannot afford to forklift upgrade now.  Do whatever you can  
> with what we
> have.  Or, if we absolutely must upgrade, find the money in the  
> bandwidth
> budget, and reduce our bandwidth if you have to do so.   Oh, and one  
> other
> thing: is our ISP supporting this IPv6 thing yet?  No?  Come back  
> when they
> do, and when you figure out how to do this with our existing  
> equipment, or find
> the money in the existing budget.  If you'll excuse me, I have a  
> meeting with
> the head of the server group, who says he needs funds for upgrading  
> our server
> farm to something called vSphere 4.  Says he can save us a couple of  
> grand per
> month in power and cooling costs, and has a plan to use the savings  
> to upgrade
> our website to something more interactive for our core stakeholders."
>
_IF_ your gear is less than 5 years old, then, the answer probably  
isn't "no".
Most gear that is less than 5 years old WILL support IPv6.

However, even in cases where it won't, it is better to move forward  
with IPv6
where you can and have islands of IPv4-only on your network than to wait
until you have a complete IPv6 solution.

The other key point to take away... If your engineer is telling you that
your ISP isn't ready yet, it's time for you to give your engineer your
backing at telling the ISP that IPv6 is a requirement for contract
renewal.

You should ask your server guy how he plans to talk to your core
stakeholders when they can't get IPv4 any more.

> Fact: many, if not most, businesses today are struggling to do basic  
> things,
> at least in my area.  IPv6 migration for many businesses is a  
> desirable, not
> an essential, thing to do, at least right now, and especially if  
> serious capex
> is required to do it.  For some businesses, IPv6 addition is more of  
> an
> annoyance than a desirable.  So, many businesses, in today's  
> economic climate,
> will be dragged into IPv6 kicking and screaming simply because it's  
> going to
> be, in their eyes, dead cost.  Unless there is either a significant  
> value-add
> or cost reduction in the mid to long term, that is.  Having more  
> addresses is
> not enough.  And thus, ISP's which serve those businesses really  
> don't have
> sufficient economic reason to expend their own capex budgets down to  
> the bone if
> the demand from their customers is low.
>

Here we come to the essential part of this which is hard to communicate.

It's kind of like flying up a box canyon (yes, I know flying up box  
canyons
is best avoided, but, bear with me)...

There comes a point, well before it is known to the passengers, where  
the
canyon becomes too narrow to make a maneuver known as a "canyon
turn" which is a _VERY_ tight course reversal and your best hope of
survival in a situation where you cannot out-climb the canyon walls.
This point may not be known to the inexperienced pilot, either, and,  
there
are plenty of aircraft dotting the slopes of various canyons to prove  
that.

If you fly beyond that point without making the turn, then, in essence,
even though nobody on the airplane knows it, the crash has already
occurred.

It will take time to deploy IPv6. If you start when IPv6 is essential  
to your
business continuity, then, your business will be suffering until your
deployment is completed.

> At the CxO level, it's all about the money.  Or the lack therof.
>
How much less money will you have when donors can not reach your
website or have a poor user experience doing so?

> In our case, yes, we're going to add IPv6 when it makes cents to do  
> so.
> Misspelling intentional; but I do have a plan in place to roll it  
> out quickly
> when needed, in no small part thanks to threads on NANOG and Cisco- 
> NSP.

That's a good thing.  Hopefully you pull the trigger soon enough that
quickly is fast enough.  The key point here is to at least have a plan
that gets IPv6 deployed to the important parts of your infrastructure
before you start losing business (with the full understanding that
plans never execute as fast as planned).

Owen





More information about the NANOG mailing list