[164314] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: .nyc - here we go...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Andrews)
Thu Jul 4 19:55:42 2013
To: Matthew Kaufman <matthew@matthew.at>
From: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 04 Jul 2013 15:48:54 -0700."
<9FF40D24-169E-4568-9F25-EE00BEEED13A@matthew.at>
Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2013 09:55:01 +1000
Cc: "ebw@abenaki.wabanaki.net" <ebw@abenaki.wabanaki.net>,
"nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
In message <9FF40D24-169E-4568-9F25-EE00BEEED13A@matthew.at>, Matthew Kaufman writes:
> Well, for starters there's whole truckloads of surplus gear that you
> can't get for pennies and use successfully.
Surplus IPv6 capable gear has been around for a long while now.
Remember most gear has had IPv6 for over a decade now. A lot of
gear that ISC got given for IPv6 development was on it 2nd or 3rd
repurposing before we got it nearly a decade ago.
> Matthew Kaufman
>
> (Sent from my iPhone)
>
> On Jul 4, 2013, at 11:11 AM, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 04 Jul 2013 10:34:41 -0700, Eric Brunner-Williams said:
> >
> >> #insert usual junk from *nog v6 evangelicals that .africa and .eos
> >> (Basque Autonomous Region) must drive v6 adoption from their
> >> ever-so-deep-pockets, or the net will die.
> >
> > I'll bite. What's the *actual* additional cost for dnssec and ipv6
> > support for a greenfield rollout? It's greenfield, so there's no
> > "our older gear/software/admins need upgrading" issues.
>
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
