On 2/6/14, David Farmer <[email protected]> wrote: > You do not want to intentionally break anything. My plan is to set up a > separate SSID that has IPv6 only, probably with NAT64 also, this allows > individual users who what to participate to do so.
This is a wise idea and a great approach ! > > However, by using a separate SSID, if there is breakage that prevents a > user from doing there job, they can simply change back to the normal > SSID and do their job. Indeed. > > We used a similar strategy when turning-on IPv6 Dual-Stack several years > ago. Over 6 months we had over 5000 people use that separate SSID > without any reported IPv6 related issues, only general wireless issues. > This was used as evidence to management for enabling IPv6 Dual-Stack > on the production wireless SSID and phasing out the separate SSID. > > The goal this time wouldn't be to converge the production and separate > IPv6 only SSID anytime soon. But to create an extended voluntary > testing environment. Also, the separate SSID provides an option when > the production SSID runs out of IPv4 addresses. > > So, please DO NOT do anything that intentionally breaks an unsuspecting > user, this is a really bad idea and is counter productive to the IPv6 > cause. Even this possibly misguided campaign calls for this to be a > voluntary action. Exactly - and this is the reason it talks about the IT professional *themselves*, not their relatives, customers, cats or parrots. > > I say possibly misguided, because telling my boss that I can't work > because something doesn't support IPv6 seems to be going a little too > far. Telling my boss that I'm participating in this IPv6 only day and I apply this to myself and other folks going to the conferences and groups and telling people about IPv6 - if we can't perform our own job using IPv6 only, there is a problem. I use IPv6-only at events whenever it is available and tell that the call over that VoIP app that is not IPv6-enabled will have to wait till the end of the event or we need to get an IPv6-enabled VoIP app, etc. Now, to clarify "IPv6-only" means "IPv6-only in the network I'm connecting from". Having a dualstack jumphost somewhere in a DC or a NAT64 is within the rules, at this time. If I can make myself work under these conditions, then I can be confident that I can recommend the others *experimenting* with those. > it my take a little longer while I try something in IPv6 only first then > switching back if it doesn't work, seems much more reasonable to me. This will be acceptable for a bigger number of people, yes. --a > > Thanks. > > -- > ================================================ > David Farmer Email: [email protected] > Office of Information Technology > University of Minnesota > 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 1-612-626-0815 > Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 1-612-812-9952 > ================================================ >
