IPv6 Thought Experiment

Wed Oct 2 16:54:29 UTC 2019

On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 11:48 AM Dovid Bender <dovid at telecurve.com> wrote:

> Antonios,
>
> It's certainly financial but it's not just companies being cheap. For
> example for smaller companies with a limited staff and small margins. They
> may want to have v6 everywhere but lack the resources to do it. It would
> for certain speed up the process but there would be collateral damage in
> the process.
>

For a small organization with limited staff and small margins, I'm curious
where the actual burden in supporting IPv6 lies. In my experience, it's not
any more costly than deploying IPv4 is (and really, less so over the past
couple of years since you can get IPv6 RIR allocations while adding IPv4
capacity means shelling out thousands or tens of thousands of capex
dollars.) I've never had an IX or transit provider or anyone else charge me
more because I'm running IPv6 in addition to my IPv4, and any gear that
doesn't support IPv6 at this point is likely old enough to be EoL and
requiring replacement due to potential (major, very costly) security issues
anyhow.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20191002/4e69f1cc/attachment.html>