On 10/04/2015 21:36, Andy Davidson wrote: > Stage one - [...] > Stage two - [...] > Stage three - [...] > > Stage four - utilise your new training and v6 capable edge to roll out > NEW services dual-stack. The incremental cost of adding v6 support to a > NEW rollout when you have to do a bunch of work to roll out a service at > all is therefore zero. v6 support for existing services can be added in > product refreshes in time.
Uh, lemme just drop this in here: http://imgur.com/AYbpRG2 Stage 4 might be a good way of burying deployment costs but I'm going to assert that stages 1 through 3 are the easier, lower cost bits. The reason is that stages 1-3 can be deployed relatively easily by a tiny number of people even on reasonably large networks. Although stage 3 - where you state the costs lie - is the first place which causes a direct and up-front cost to be incurred in terms of resourcing and config, it can still be rolled out relatively quickly and easily. The problem with stage 4 is that it requires that the expertise garnered by the initial deployment team is spread throughout the rest of the company, ranging from product development to the FLS desk, right through to customers. This is a prolonged and time-consuming process, and consequently expensive. I'd love to see a larger scale discussion about this, because it's one of the main blockages for ipv6 adoption and discussion of live cases would help other organisations make the jump. Nick
