N reasons for not deploying ipv6 (was: Re: [narten at us.ibm.com:PI addressing in IPv6 advances in ARIN])

[Eric Klein]

On 17-apr-2006,  Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
>
>> But there is a perception (mostly in the US) that there is no  problem 
>> and it will be too expensive to upgrade/replace existing  hardware.
>
> I think that's a fairy tale too. What kind of gear that you can buy  today 
> can't do IPv6? And how much of that is un-upgradable? Basically  only 
> stuff that has hardware support for IPv4 processing built in,  such as 
> multilayer switches, some routers and some things like load  balancers. If 
> you simply only buy new gear that either supports IPv6  or can be upgraded 
> to support it, then it really doesn't have to cost  much as you'll do 
> upgrades, reconfigurations and training sessions  anyway over the course 
> of some years so adding IPv6 to that doesn't  make it much more expensive.

I tend to agree that if the hardware bought in the past had all be IPv6 
upgradable then there would be no problem, but there are a lot a old routers 
and switches out there that, for example there are still Cisco 2601's out 
there that are still working (back to that "if it ain't broke" comment) so 
there is a replacement/upgrade cost as they have passed end-of-life. Also 
there is the time/effort in upgrading all the IP stacks on all the 
computers. Personally I think these are excuses, but these are what are 
cited in the articles and US Government reports estimating the costs of 
transition.