[afripv6-discuss] FW: [ipv6-members] Fwd: Is the Transition toIPv6 a "Market Failure?"

Mark Tinka mtinka at globaltransit.net
Mon Jun 28 08:43:07 SAST 2010

On Monday 28 June 2010 02:19:11 pm kondwa at m-hi.org wrote:

> I am wondering where the issue of cost comes in. Most
>  hardware nowadays is already implemented with ipv6.

But the problem is that most hardware "already in 
production" is working fine for today's technology, and may 
need an upgrade to support v6.

It rests on the vendors and the operators on whether they 
prefer to add support in the existing boxes (good for 
operators, hardware/software limitations notwithstanding) or 
have the operators install newer platforms that come with v6 
natively (good for the vendors, they sell more boxes).

Both sides are still playing chicken, unfortunately. But, 
progress will be made. There's only one way to the fire :-).

>  Information on how to migrate is available all over.
>  According to this:
> http://www.fiercetelecom.com/story/it-pros-take-ipv6-migr
> ation-their-own-hands/2010-06-01

There's a lot of presentations and documents online about 
how many folk have already done it. In some parts of the 
network, it's fairly easy, e.g., the core. In other parts, 
not so, e.g., broadband access.

So deployment toolkits will not cover all areas. There's 
still a lot of gotchas to be had depending on what your 
deployment is, e.g., look at options for the Enterprise LAN 
and see just how silly things have become, with SLAAC vs. 
DHCPv6 and all that.

> Some IT Pros are already implementing it in their home
>  networks.

But most end users aren't IT pros. And as it were, they 
don't need to be. If they were, half our problems would be 
solved :-).

But let's keep it real...

>  Organisation fail to implement it because of
>  unjustified costs.

Each organization needs to assess any costs related its 
deployment of v6. However, the truth remains - at some 
point, if they want to remain connected to the Internet in 
the future, they will need to deploy v6.

> Organisations already have IT departments to do these
>  changes. As I have already said hardware already has it
>  enabled. Where then would the cost come from?

Back-porting it to existing hardware. Back-porting it to 
existing software. Training of IT staff, upgrading existing 
systems (and their associated service interruption costs), 
upgrading back-end systems, provisioning systems, monitoring 
systems, e.t.c.

There's a lot more to it than just "turning it on", 
especially for operations running at scale. But the task 
force Hisham is trying to put together will help bring these 
issues to light, and hopefully, get them addressed globally 
enough that individual businesses and users can adapt those 
principals to their unique situations.

> I think we might as well go on deploy and at any level
>  organisation or ISP. With dual stack and/or tunnelling
>  technics available.

Yes, that is the spirit. Go out, do it, feel the pain, fix 
the issue, gain the experience.

But, it's not a walk-in-the-park for everyone. Some 
organizations will have a harder time deploying it than 

Make no mistake, though, v6 is the only solution.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/afripv6-discuss/attachments/20100628/a17cfd00/attachment-0001.bin

More information about the afripv6-discuss mailing list