Daryl G. Jurbala
daryl at introspect.net
Fri Oct 30 12:32:11 EDT 2009
On Oct 27, 2009, at 10:42 AM, Scott Berkman wrote:
> It hasn’t been introduced into most product lines for the same
> reason any other feature hasn’t been implemented in a vendor’s
> system – lack of financial motivation.
And that was exactly the point I was making. It's hard to justify any
financial expenditures as a small/medium ITSP when you can't
demonstrate a push by the people you connect with (on the carrier
side) and a tipping point of consumer access available with IPv6 (on
the CPE side). Financial expenditures include not only gear and
software, but man hours for planning. Especially the planning -
because right now its not even clear exactly what/when you're planning
You want to talk from a purely technical standpoint? Sure, IPv6 will
make things much easier as far as CPE access and NAT. But I'd like to
think that most of us here who deal with CPE behind NAT are pretty
good at it at this point. I know I am. Sure, life would be easier
without it, but it's completely manageable. Even 2 and 3 deep.
Running out of IP addresses? My /22 will do well for me for many
years. I'm not worried about running out of space on my end.
Especially as many of the devices I'm using increase their (for lack
of a better term) port density so I can run (and therefor address)
fewer of them.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the VoiceOps