Re: Ars Technica on IPv4 exhaustion

[Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>]

On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Justin M. Streiner
<streiner () cluebyfour org> wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>
> > > 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.
>
>
> In the simplest cases, yes.  Throw things that often exist in mid to large
> sized enterprises, like firewalls, DHCP servers, load balancers, log

sure thing, except that the poster did not talk about mid/large
enterprises, his point was about small ones... where v6 probably
doesn't matter for things listed except firewalls.

> analyzers, etc, having to upgrade $XYZ to get IPv6 support or fix bugs, and
> there's a bit more to it.  These are not insurmountable problems, but
> administrative/political/financial inertia is a real thing in many shops.
>
>
> > > 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 could be problems with things like DHCPv6, depending on how the user's
> ISP provisions service.  SLAAC 'just works' for the most part, but if the
> FooTronics 1000 an all-in-one router/firewall/wireless AP/printer/
> belt sander/toaster from $BIGBOXSTORE doesn't come with firewall settings
> that let IPv6 work just out of the box, or at least have a big, shiny "Make
> IPv6 work" button, support calls will be generated.  ISPs and FooTronics
> both hate support calls.

sure.

> Again, playing devil's advocate here.  I just don't look forward to dealing
> with support calls from customers who bought kit from vendors who slammed in
> IPv6 support as quickly and cheaply as possible.

yup. I sort of don't think the arguement about 'business connections'
is even relevant though. I'd bet that the vast majority of connections
to the 'net are actually consumer ones... Fixing those shoudl be the
goal for the ISP side, so they can continue to grow customer bases
without worrying about CGN and other associated expenses.

Once you solve out the consumer problems the business link ones should
'just work'. Whether the enterprise wants to upgrade/install/side-step
into v6 is not relevant.