Re: IPv6 Ignorance

[Jason Leschnik <leschnik () gmail com>]

Has said forum guy never heard of a phased implementation? Or would he
rather a "big bang" cut over, i'm sure that will work swell.

The best way to summarise the feeling for IPv6 was expressed in the Packet
Pushers Podcast and that is Network Administrators and System
Administrators have forgotten what it means to run a multiple stack
Network.

I also think many people are seeing IPv6 as a unnecessary evil due to the
way it has come around and that comes back to the whole "your doomed
theory" and "we are only upgrading because there is a depletion", This
comes back to a lack of understanding and lack of interest in change.

I cannot remember where i heard it, but someone said that it will take a
killer IPv6 application that cannot occur on v4 to get people to jump. I'm
sure if Facebook/Google decided they were sick of v4 for a week you would
see I.T. departments agenda change quite rapidly (obviously this isn't
sustainable)

Education seems to be the key here... Rusty gears is the problem, people
haven't had to worry about addressing for such a long time now. Feel kinda
sorry for the guys who have to readdress IPv6 though *mwaha*

On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Tom Limoncelli <tal () whatexit org> wrote:

> My biggest fear is that statements like this will take on a life of their
> own:
>
> " I can dual stack, then I am not out of IPv4 addresses, and thus I
> have no need for IPv6. If I'm out of IPv4 then I need IPv6 and I can't
> dual stack."  http://forum.ubnt.com/showthread.php?p=355722
>
> Not true but it certainly sounds logical to the average person.
>
> What creates this impression is that there is no "deadline".  The IPv4
> -> Dual Stack -> pure IPv6 transition is complex so everyone focuses
> on "IPv4 -> Dual Stack" forgetting that it is a transition step.  The
> final step seems so far off that people ignore it, and therefore the
> justification for the first step fades.
>
> (the remainder of this post is brainstorming; apply a grain of salt)
>
> There are ways to fix this.  For example there was a deadline for when
> Dual Stack was to go away, a "Dual Stack 10 year count-down" would
> drive the point home.  However nothing like this exists.
>
> This thread is making me think that I should change how I talk about
> IPv6 publicly.  I need to put more emphasis on DS as being a temporary
> thing.  It is in my mind but perhaps not in how I speak.
>
> The problem with picking a 10-year or 5-year "campaign" is that
> underestimating the amount of time makes us look like "the sky is
> falling" and too long gives people a reason to procrastinate.
>
> Then again... I believe what will make the biggest # of people adopt
> IPv6 will be if they see everyone else adopting it.  That's why it is
> so important for IPv6 to be offered by default to all new ISP
> customers, that tech-savy enterprises need to deploy it, and so on.
> It is all about building a critical mass.
>
> Tom
>
> --
> Speaking at MacTech Conference 2012. http://mactech.com/conference";
> http://EverythingSysadmin.com  -- my blog
> http://www.TomOnTime.com -- my videos


-- 
Regards,
Jason Leschnik.

[m] 0432 35 4224
[w@] jason dot leschnik <at> ansto dot gov dot au<jason.leschnik () ansto gov au>
[U@] jml974 () uow edu au