IP4 Space
Mark Andrews
marka at isc.org
Fri Mar 26 18:10:45 UTC 2010
In message <201003261157.23601.lowen at pari.edu>, Lamar Owen writes:
> 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 t
> o
> 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.
What percentage of your equipment already supports IPv6? Most 5 year old
pieces of equipement already have IPv6 support. It just needs to be enabled.
> No, we cannot afford to forklift upgrade now.
IPv6 is *not* a "forklift upgrade". It's a parallel deployment that can
be done incrementally one service at a time. The first step is to get
the bits to you.
> 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.
Turning on IPv6 doesn't really affect the amount of bandwith you use.
> Oh, and one other
> thing: is our ISP supporting this IPv6 thing yet? No?
You don't need your ISP to support IPv6 to turn on IPv6. You just need
a IPv4 path to someone who does support IPv6.
> Come back when they
> do, and when you figure out how to do this with our existing equipment, or fi
> nd
> 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 serve
> r
> farm to something called vSphere 4. Says he can save us a couple of grand pe
> r
> month in power and cooling costs, and has a plan to use the savings to upgrad
> e
> our website to something more interactive for our core stakeholders."
>
> 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 cape
> x
> 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.
Most IPv4 only ISPs are already carrying IPv6 traffic. It's just
encapsulated by one of the early deployment methods.
> At the CxO level, it's all about the money. Or the lack therof.
Turn on IPv6 should be a $0 cost. Fully supporting IPv6 on all the services
you offer will have some cost.
> 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.
> --
> Lamar Owen
> Chief Information Officer
> Pisgah Astronomical Research Institute
>
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka at isc.org
More information about the NANOG
mailing list