On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 11:27:18AM +0200, Ronald van der Pol wrote:
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 21:39:03 -0400, Keith Moore wrote:
There isn't going to be a great transition to IPv6 in the sense that
you seem to mean. IPv4 and IPv6 will coexist for a long time.
Yes, but I am afraid that underestimates the overhead of running
dual stack.
Indeed, everything you suggest means that there is an increase in costs
to adopt IPv6, because at this stage you would be very brave to launch
an IPv6-only service, and thus dual-stack is the only way to go. This
ramp in expenses is a barrier to IPv6 adoption, when no clear and
significant additonal revenues can be seen.
However, an operator that does go dual-stack, and is able to become proficient
in managing and operating such an infrastructure, will be well placed to
take advantage of the new IPv6 services as they emerge. We hear Sony saying
all consumer networked appliances will support IPv6 by 2005. We hear MS
talk about IPv6 for pervasive collaborative communication (p2p, conferencing
and messaging). The services and applications are coming.
Question is, who are the early operator adoptors, especially in the home
and enterprise solutions space, and what are their business plans?
At the moment the academic research networks are taking the lead, because
they do not need a business case to deploy IPv6. Their philosophy is that
if they deploy IPv6 to some of the best minds in the universities, new
applications and innovation will follow. Their experience, and
the fact that they iron out the early adoptor bugs with the likes of
Cisco and Juniper, is good news for the second wave commercial adoptors,
which we're just beginning to see the tip of now.
I don't see the DoD adopting IPv6 on a whim; they'll have done their
homework...
Tim