Re: [v6ops] EOM (was: Re: [OPSAWG] Heads up - Plea for allocating a /8 to ISPs)

[Christopher LILJENSTOLPE <[e-mail]>]

Actually, you will have similar problems with non v6 customer equipment (ie ce ewuipment, once you run out of v4, unless you have some plans other than pure dual-stack

--
Pardon the typos - sent from a silly keyboard

On 17/11/2010, at 16:13, Randy Bush <[e-mail]> wrote:

>> The operators are at fault here, but guess what, so are the rest of
>> us.  We spent WAY too much time discussing the PERFECT transition
>> mechanism, rather than a suite of WORKABLE transition mechanisms to
>> deal with runout (which is different than a clean dual-stack world).
> 
> s/the operators/some operators/
> 
> i am not saying our financial folk saw the great benefit of our rolling
> ipv6 in the late '90s, but we bit the bullet and paid the price.  it was
> a choice.  other operators made other choices.
> 
> those providers who placed a higher value on the short term, have been
> delaying as long as possible, will continue to delay, and the price they
> pay will be higher.  and the sales folk of those who have not delayed
> plan to happily educate those providers' customers on the great customer
> benefits of nat444444.
> 
> these were business decisions.  this is all about business.
> 
> randy
>