paul at paulgraydon.co.uk
Tue Feb 1 15:24:57 CST 2011
On 02/01/2011 10:32 AM, Majdi S. Abbas wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 10:27:45AM -1000, Paul Graydon wrote:
>> insignificant changes between v4 and v6. There is nothing on line
>> that isn't accessible over IPv4 so there has been no critical app
>> outside the infrastructure to spur such changes yet either.
> You're speaking for yourself here, as some of us have
> hosts with no A record.
> If your business requires connectivity, you're not going to
> have a choice, so you might as well get with the program. It's
> less about making a business case for v6, and more about risk
> management at this point.
> It's not as if we haven't had 15 years to get it together...
I should emphasise I'm a sysadmin rather than a service provider, and
I'm mostly speaking generically based on conversations with a number of
I've been trying to get my service provider to sort out IPv6 for a while
now (they tell me their infrastructure is ready, but they're being lazy
about getting blocks sorted out) and already done as much preparation as
I can with my infrastructure to ensure its ready for it.
That said there are no services we use that are IPv6 only, nor are there
likely to be for a while that I can tell as none of our service partners
are talking about it, and nor are we getting reports of anyone unable to
access our services due to lack of IPv6 on the front end.
I know how ugly that sounds, I really do, but that's the way most people
will see it. You have to provide incentive to make a change, and "It's
better" rarely is enough. "People won't be able to access our site"
sure helps but being unable to put a date on it still reduces incentive
(especially when Management get involved, and especially if there is a
financial outlay involving firewalls etc.). People bury their heads in
the sand and will continue to pretend there is nothing wrong until
they're /forced/ to change. As much as it was a hideous and inaccurate
article, that Fox news story that was posted on list the other day came
up was great for fighting for change. The grossly inaccurate
end-of-the-world text provides a good hook for getting the lumbering
beast moving in the right direction.
The White House's push for IPv6 amongst federal agencies is currently my
best guess at what will probably see the first thing to transition to it
from my perspective at work, though I sincerely hope we'll be on IPv6
long before that happens. As for when we'll switch internally? No
idea.. all machines have IPv6 so some local traffic probably uses it,
but most are still based on IPv4 and until I have time / money to make
some other infrastructure changes will remain that way (our office
environment equipment can't handle IPv6, unlike our production environment)
I'm sure there are some cases with IPv6, yourself as an example, and I
know an ISP I worked for in the UK had a customer several years ago who
had a critical need for it, but that's still in the minority. In every
case as soon as there is a business reason for it and its compelling
enough people will take the time to make the transition.
More information about the NANOG