On Nov 28, 2012, at 4:17 PM, "Dobbins, Roland" <rdobb...@arbor.net> wrote:
> > On Nov 29, 2012, at 3:04 AM, Tony Hain wrote: > >> Getting the cpe vendors to ship in quantity requires the ISP engineering >> organizations to say in unison "we are deploying IPv6 and will only >> recommend products that pass testing". > > Do you see any evidence of that occurring? I don't. > Yes. Comcast, Cable Labs, Time Warner are doing pretty well at this now. Others there is room for improvement, but it's definitely better than a year ago. > Also, a lot of broadband consumers and enterprise organizations buy and > deploy their own CPE. Do you see a lot of IPv6 activity there? I don't, > excepting an IPv6 RFP checkbox for enterprises, which doesn't have any formal > requirements and is essentially meaningless because of that fact. Very little, but, most of those buy based on the "supported device" list from their carrier, so… > >> You claim to be looking for the economic incentive, but are looking with >> such a short time horizon that all you see are the 'waste' products vendors >> are pushing to make a quick sale, knowing that you will eventually come back >> for yet-another-hack to delay transition, and prop up your expertise in a >> legacy technology. > > No. > > What I am looking for is an economic incentive which will justify the [IMHO] > wildly overoptimisitic claims which some are making in re ubiquitous > end-to-end native IPv6 deployment. > > Otherwise, I believe it will be a much more gradual adoption curve, as you > indicate. > The inability to add customers to IPv4 will become a factor in this. 60% of the world's population still isn't on the internet and I expect a significant fraction of that will be coming on in the next 2-4 years. Owen
