Curious choices made by Cisco/Tandberg

[Hannigan, Martin]

On 3/3/11 11:31 AM, "Mohacsi Janos" <mohacsi at niif.hu> wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, 3 Mar 2011, Bill Owens wrote:
> 
>> We have a Cisco/Tandberg H.323 endpoint, the C20 model. This week the network
>> engineer who takes care of it decided to do a code upgrade to fix a security
>> problem, and found out that the firmware now supports IPv6. Good news, right?
>> Well, not exactly:
>> 
>> http://www.tandberg.com/collateral/documentation/User_Manuals/Cisco%20Telepre
>> sence%20System%20ProfileC20%20and%20QuickSetC20%20Administrator%20Guide%20(TC
>> 4.0).pdf
>> 
>> Network [1..1] IPStack
>> Select which internet protocols the system will support.
>> Requires user role: ADMIN
>> Value space: <IPv4/IPv6>
>> IPv4: IP version 4 is supported.
>> IPv6: IP version 6 is supported. The IPv4 settings (IP Address, IP Subnet
>> Mask and Gateway) will be disabled.
>>             ^^^^ ^^ ^^^^^^^^
>> 
>> Yes, that's right, you can have IPv6, but only if you're willing to forego
>> IPv4. On the one hand, I want to applaud their optimism. But I'm too stunned
>> by the cluelessness. . .
> 
> Almost the same at Polycom. Your system can registered either via IPv4
> or via IPv6.  Exclusive OR!
> 


I wouldn't be too fast to assume that this is lack of clue. I would guess
that it's a processor limit = cost. Why would you need to dual stack your
phone regardless?

Best,

-M<