Re: Question about migrating to IPv6 with multiple upstreams.

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

On Jun 14, 2011, at 2:57 PM, Scott Helms wrote:

> > Yes... The key word there is perception. The question is whether it makes
> > more sense to put effort into correcting mis-perceptions or to put the effort
> > into providing workarounds which provide a sub-par networking experience
> > to the end user.
> >
> > IMNSHO, it is better to put effort into education. I'm surprised to find someone
> > from a .EDU on the opposite side of that thought. One would normally expect
> > them to favor the idea of education over hackery.
>
> There are few things harder on the planet than changing perception and one of the few is changing human behavior.   
> NAT is normal for many/most enterprises and the thought of trying to explain sub-par networking to most business 
> leaders makes my teeth hurt.

It only took us about 15 years to change behavior to NAT by default, so, I'm betting
that if we do the right thing and put in the effort, in 15 years, we can have a nice
NAT-free network. Personally, I think it's worth it.

I have very little trouble explaining sub-par networking to most of them. Usually
it goes something like this...

Remember when your IT department came to you with projections of enormous
savings on telephone costs in 2003 and your company did their first foray into
VOIP?

Yeah, that's a good example of sub-par networking.


Owen