[161304] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: What Should an Engineer Address when 'Selling' IPv6 to Executives?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Arturo Servin)
Thu Mar 7 05:42:21 2013
From: Arturo Servin <aservin@lacnic.net>
In-Reply-To: <2CEB1D36-3963-4C62-A99E-5F303E8B4CAB@arbor.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 08:42:02 -0200
To: "Dobbins, Roland" <rdobbins@arbor.net>
X-LACNIC.uy-MailScanner-From: aservin@lacnic.net
Cc: NANOG General Mail List <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 7 Mar 2013, at 02:50, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
>=20
> On Mar 7, 2013, at 11:36 AM, Jared Mauch wrote:
>=20
>> I would pitch it as follows: We need to at least have IPv6 access to =
troubleshoot/understand customers that have dual-stack technology.
>=20
> That's a great point, but my guess is that the suits will say that =
since none of their customers are using IPv6, there's no urgency (yes, I =
know, it's better to be prepared ahead of time; but foresight doesn't =
generally carry much weight in quarterly-driven enterprises).
>=20
Yes, but this is an argument to deploy the whole IPv6 thing, not =
against a strategy to first deploy in-house and then to customers, isn't =
it?
In my experience, it is always best to try IPv6 in-house (at =
least a small office, a group, etc.) and then move to customers, YMMV.
/as
