Ars Technica on IPv4 exhaustion
earthurs at legacyinmate.com
Thu Jun 19 17:53:20 UTC 2014
Thank You for responding.
If mid to small companies have equipment made in the last 7 years, they will not need to replace equipment.
Most net admins at the mid to small companies have no idea about IPV6.
Cost is a major consideration at the mid to small size companies, if they need to upgrade equipment.
The difference between IPV4 and IPV6 for someone not familiar is huge,
1. There is a totally new format dotted decimal to colon.
2. The 32 bit to 128 bit is/or can be quite challenging for some net admins.
From: christopher.morrow at gmail.com [mailto:christopher.morrow at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Christopher Morrow
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2014 10:14 AM
To: Edward Arthurs
Cc: nanog list
Subject: Re: Ars Technica on IPv4 exhaustion
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Edward Arthurs <earthurs at legacyinmate.com> wrote:
> There are several obstacles to overcome, IMHO 1. The companies at the
> mid size and smaller levels have to invest in newer equipment that
> handles IPV6.
if they have gear made in the last 7yrs it's likely already got the right bits for v6 support, right?
> 2. The network Admins at the above mentioned companies need to learn
> IPV6, most will want there company to pay the bill for this.
for a large majority of the use cases it's just "configure that other family on the interface" and done.
> 3. The vendors that make said equipment should lower the cost of said
> equipment to prompt said companies into purchasing said equipment.
the equipment in question does both v4 and v6 ... so why lower pricing?
(also, see 'if made in the last 7 yrs, it's already done and you probably don't have to upgrade')
> There is a huge difference between IPV4 and IPV6 and there will be a
> lot of
'huge difference' ... pls quantify this. (unless you just mean colons instead of periods and letters in the address along with numbers)
More information about the NANOG