[102994] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 on SOHO routers?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Leo Bicknell)
Wed Mar 12 16:44:40 2008
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:38:24 -0500
From: Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Mail-Followup-To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAuAAAAAAAAAKTyXRN5/+lGvU59a+P7CFMBAN6gY+ZG84BMpVQcAbDh1IQAAAATbSgAABAAAADQFKGbhWNESazlCuo6mXVAAQAAAAA=@iname.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
--0F1p//8PRICkK4MW
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In a message written on Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 03:06:24PM -0500, Frank Bulk -=
iNAME wrote:
> Furthermore, he stated that networking equipment companies like Cisco will
> be moving away from IPv4 in 5 years or so. This is the first time I've
> heard this posited -- I had a hard believing that, but he claims it with
> some authority. Anyone hear anything like this? My own opinion is that
> we'll see dual-stack for at least a decade or two to come.
ISP's are very good at one thing, driving out unnecessary cost.
Running dual stack increases cost. While I'm not sure about the 5
year part, I'm sure ISP's will move to disable IPv4 support as soon
as the market will let them as a cost saving measure. Runing for
"decades" dual stacked does not make a lot of economic sense for
all involved.
--=20
Leo Bicknell - bicknell@ufp.org - CCIE 3440
PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
--0F1p//8PRICkK4MW
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQFH2D8wNh6mMG5yMTYRAqQeAJ4g6ngffu22nbTZOp1OG5+rSepNEACfaohC
17SiepaRrYyTqHqNt8rmC0k=
=Y4q3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--0F1p//8PRICkK4MW--
