[161239] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: What Should an Engineer Address when 'Selling' IPv6 to Executives?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mukom Akong T.)
Tue Mar 5 21:46:57 2013
In-Reply-To: <201303051534440664.01900314@sentry.24cl.com>
From: "Mukom Akong T." <mukom.tamon@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 06:46:03 +0400
To: "Mike." <the.lists@mgm51.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 12:34 AM, Mike. <the.lists@mgm51.com> wrote:
> I would lean towards
>
> f) Cost/benefit of deploying IPv6.
>
I certainly agree, which is why I propose understanding you organisation's
business model and how specifically v4 exhaustion will threaten that. IPv6
is the cast as a solution to that, plus future unknown benefits that may
result from e-2-e and NAT elimination.
I have no clue how to sell 'benefit' of IPv6 in isolation as right now even
for engineers, there's not much of a benefit except more address space.
--=20
Mukom Akong T.
http://about.me/perfexcellence | twitter: @perfexcellent
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
---------------------------------------------------------------
=E2=80=9CWhen you work, you are the FLUTE through whose lungs the whisperin=
g of the
hours turns to MUSIC" - Kahlil Gibran
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
----------------------------------------------------------------
