Re: IPv6 Pain Experiment

[Seth Mattinen <sethm () rollernet us>]

On 10/3/19 13:13, Mark Andrews wrote:
> > On 4 Oct 2019, at 4:35 am, Seth Mattinen<sethm () rollernet us>  wrote:
> >
> > On 10/2/19 15:03, Naslund, Steve wrote:
> > > In my experience, the biggest hurdle to installing a pure IPv6 has nothing to do with network gear or network 
> > > engineers.  That stuff I expect to support v6.  This biggest hurdle is the dumb stuff like machinery interfaces, 
> > > surveillance devices, the must have IP interface on such and such of an obsolete appliance, etc.  The dumb legacy app 
> > > that supports the ancient obsolete pen plotter that we must keep forever, etc.
> >
> > Using the plotter example, why is it obsolete and must be replaced if it still works? It's a waste of money to dump fully 
> > functional hardware because software. The argument to justify its replacement needs to be something along the lines of the new plotter 
> > will output faster and save X hours a day which is equal to Y hours of time over a year. Not that the new one supports IPv6 and yeah 
> > that's about it. Oh the new one also supports TLSv1.3 to make sure your plots can't be intercepted by your cube neighbor as 
> > you walk across the office.
> Firstly adding IPv6 doesn’t remove IPv4.




I know that. What I'm trying to say is that many companies aren't 
willing to throw away working equipment to gain a nebulous (to them) 
software feature like IPv6 that doesn't improve on its hardware 
functional state.