[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: ipng
Subject: Re: [IPv6] [EXTERNAL] Re: Reasons for slow IPv6 adoption in Enterprises
From: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu () gmail ! com>
Date: 2023-07-22 13:34:50
Message-ID: a0c68acc-12fb-4993-ab21-d0420db8a64c () gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]
and, at IETF, are still all newly chartered WGs considering IPv6 as a
start or are we back to IPv4 business as usual?
Alex
Le 22/07/2023 à 15:32, Alexandre Petrescu a écrit :
>
>
> Le 22/07/2023 à 00:02, Ted Lemon a écrit :
>> IOW rather than discussing what we should add, we should discuss what
>> we can remove? :)
>
> Aiming at something to reduce such as to match the impedance one would
> wonder whether examples exist - are there large Enterprise networks of
> desktops using IPv6?
>
> Other than Enterprise desktop LANs, recently I heard about these
> 'hyperscaler' enterprises - might they consider IPv6 a help in easier
> scaling?
>
> Alex
>
>>
>> Op vr 21 jul 2023 om 17:58 schreef Manfredi (US), Albert E
>> <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com <mailto:albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ipv6 <ipv6-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org>> On
>> Behalf Of Brian E Carpenter
>>
>> > I concur. I would even advance the slightly heretical opinion
>> that it doesn't matter. We always planned on an extensive period of
>> IPv4/IPv6 coexistence. (Note to John Day: it wasn't an oversight, it
>> was the plan.)
>>
>> Yes, it was the IETF plan, however the management of specific
>> enterprises out there did not necessarily know that this was plan.
>> For them, the fact that the transition period has become so long,
>> open-ended in truth, is more a matter of perceived complexity vs
>> necessity.
>>
>> In EE, there's the concept of "matching impedances." If you want to
>> maximize power transfer, you have to match the output impedance of
>> the amp with the impedance of the load. Applied here, I'd say that
>> going from IPv4 to IPv6 would have to appear straightforward, for
>> the transition to happen smoothly and in a timely fashion. Match
>> impedances, avoid reflections.
>>
>> This is what has been happening in cases I'm familiar with:
>>
>> Management: "What's with IPv6? Is it an easy transition?"
>>
>> IT: "No, many things change. More address space is one feature, but
>> there are many other changes that come with it too."
>>
>> Management: "Is there a strong case for us to be pushing this
>> transition now?"
>>
>> IT: "Not really."
>>
>> Management: "Next item."
>>
>> For every scheme, people will find problems and will implement
>> work-arounds. It's when work-arounds are not possible or just too
>> onerous that drastic change must happen. Seems to me that more
>> changes are created in IPv6 compared with IPv4, even if
>> well-intentioned, the more a transition is delayed. Having to
>> re-learn all of the work-arounds applied in IPv4, almost for sure
>> having to create new work-arounds for IPv6, is not an easy sell.
>>
>> Bert
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>> ipv6@ietf.org <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>> ipv6@ietf.org
>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
[Attachment #5 (text/html)]
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p><font size="2"><font face="Courier New">and, at IETF, are still
all newly chartered WGs considering IPv6 as a start or are we
back to IPv4 business as usual?</font></font></p>
<p><font size="2"><font face="Courier New">Alex</font></font><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Le 22/07/2023 à 15:32, Alexandre
Petrescu a écrit :<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:ccfc35ad-8db4-67c2-93d5-86d1278fa5c4@gmail.com">
<br>
<br>
Le 22/07/2023 à 00:02, Ted Lemon a écrit :
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">IOW rather than discussing what we should
add, we should discuss what we can remove? :)
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Aiming at something to reduce such as to match the impedance one
would wonder whether examples exist - are there large Enterprise
networks of desktops using IPv6?
<br>
<br>
Other than Enterprise desktop LANs, recently I heard about these
'hyperscaler' enterprises - might they consider IPv6 a help in
easier scaling?
<br>
<br>
Alex
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<br>
Op vr 21 jul 2023 om 17:58 schreef Manfredi (US), Albert E
<<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" \
href="mailto:albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com">albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" \
href="mailto:albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com"><mailto:albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com></a>>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----
<br>
From: ipv6 <<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" \
href="mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org">ipv6-bounces@ietf.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" \
href="mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org"><mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org></a>> On \
<br> Behalf Of Brian E Carpenter
<br>
<br>
> I concur. I would even advance the slightly heretical
opinion
<br>
that it doesn't matter. We always planned on an extensive
period of
<br>
IPv4/IPv6 coexistence. (Note to John Day: it wasn't an
oversight, it
<br>
was the plan.)
<br>
<br>
Yes, it was the IETF plan, however the management of
specific
<br>
enterprises out there did not necessarily know that this was
plan.
<br>
For them, the fact that the transition period has become so
long,
<br>
open-ended in truth, is more a matter of perceived
complexity vs
<br>
necessity.
<br>
<br>
In EE, there's the concept of "matching impedances." If you
want to
<br>
maximize power transfer, you have to match the output
impedance of
<br>
the amp with the impedance of the load. Applied here, I'd
say that
<br>
going from IPv4 to IPv6 would have to appear
straightforward, for
<br>
the transition to happen smoothly and in a timely fashion.
Match
<br>
impedances, avoid reflections.
<br>
<br>
This is what has been happening in cases I'm familiar with:
<br>
<br>
Management: "What's with IPv6? Is it an easy transition?"
<br>
<br>
IT: "No, many things change. More address space is one
feature, but
<br>
there are many other changes that come with it too."
<br>
<br>
Management: "Is there a strong case for us to be pushing
this
<br>
transition now?"
<br>
<br>
IT: "Not really."
<br>
<br>
Management: "Next item."
<br>
<br>
For every scheme, people will find problems and will
implement
<br>
work-arounds. It's when work-arounds are not possible or
just too
<br>
onerous that drastic change must happen. Seems to me that
more
<br>
changes are created in IPv6 compared with IPv4, even if
<br>
well-intentioned, the more a transition is delayed. Having
to
<br>
re-learn all of the work-arounds applied in IPv4, almost for
sure
<br>
having to create new work-arounds for IPv6, is not an easy
sell.
<br>
<br>
Bert
<br>
<br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
<br>
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" \
href="mailto:ipv6@ietf.org">ipv6@ietf.org</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" \
href="mailto:ipv6@ietf.org"><mailto:ipv6@ietf.org></a> <br>
Administrative Requests:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" \
href="https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6">https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" \
href="https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6"><https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6></a>
<br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
<br>
<br>
<br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
<br>
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" \
href="mailto:ipv6@ietf.org">ipv6@ietf.org</a> <br>
Administrative Requests:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" \
href="https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6">https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6</a>
<br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic