steve at nerdvana.org.au
Thu Jan 13 00:43:22 MST 2011
On 01/13/2011 05:57 PM, Paul Wayper wrote:
> And just what do you mean by 'backward compatible'? Do you mean 'my Linux 2.2
> machine has to be able to work in an IPv6 world'? Do you mean 'my IPv6-only
> website has to be accessible to IPv4-only machines'? Do you mean 'I shouldn't
> have to learn new addressing schemes, protocols and networking methods, the
> old ones should just work by magic'? Or what?
Er....There's new protocols with ipv6?
Stateless vs stateful vs Route Advertisement, etc doesn't take that long
to understand, once you get into it, but that's the extent of the "new"
> (From my own experience, I also think that the slow pace of IPv6 deployment
> isn't because a whole bunch of network engineers are sitting in the back rooms
> saying "hmmm, Management wants us to implement IPv6, but it sounds a bit
> difficult, let's play Go instead" - partly because that's now how organisation
> power structures work, and partly because that's not how most network
> engineers I know work. It's more likely to be the engineers saying "when are
> we going to implement IPv6" and management asking "well, can we survive
> without it?", to the effect we see today.)
Most network engineers I know are spending their time convincing the
boss they need to either upgrade most of their kit, or in come cases,
replace it outright, as it's not v6 compatible.
That in itself is not a small task, and often requires a few months in a
test lab and lots of work in EoI, Tenders, Assessments, etc. Couple that
with the low number of ISP's that are doing native dual stack v6, and
you're fighting an uphill battle, as the boss most of the time can't get
it at home, so sees no benefit in spending the dollars to give the
engineers "new toys".
More information about the linux