owen at delong.com
Tue Mar 25 00:26:56 UTC 2014
On Mar 22, 2014, at 10:16 AM, Nick Hilliard <nick at foobar.org> wrote:
> On 22/03/2014 16:29, Doug Barton wrote:
>> It is a mistake to believe that the only reason to add IPv6 to your network
>> is size. Adding IPv6 to your network _now_ is the right decision because at
>> some point in the not-too-distant future it will be the dominant network
>> technology, and you don't want to get left behind.
> not wanting to rain on anyone's parade, but people have been claiming this
> since the days of IPng. Granted, we're a couple of years after IANA runout
> and two RIRs are also in post-runout phase, but the level of pain
> associated with continued deployment of ipv4-only services is still nowhere
> near the point that ipv6 can be considered a viable alternative.
True. However, if you wait until that point to start deploying IPv6, you’re in for a LOT of pain during that protracted emergency transition phase you just volunteered for.
OTOH, if you implement IPv6 in parallel to your IPv4 from this point forward, there’s very little additional pain and retrofitting your IPv4 can proceed at some pace until complete. After that, you can turn off IPv4 as soon as you don’t need it any more and enjoy the show while everyone else plays catchup.
More information about the NANOG