On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 3:37 PM, Jeff McAdams <je...@iglou.com> wrote:
> On Thu, June 2, 2016 13:31, Christopher Morrow wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 1:17 PM, Mike Hammett <na...@ics-il.net> wrote: > > >> Yes. > >> > > REALLY??? I mean REALLY? people that operate networks haven't haven't > > had beaten into their heads: 1) cgn is expensive > > 2) there is no more ipv4 (not large amounts for large deployments of new > > thingies) 3) there really isn't much else except the internet for global > > networking and reachabilty 4) ipv6 'works' on almost all gear you'd > deploy > > in your network > > (more, reasonably valid observations elided) > > Yes. I had a member of an account team for a networking vendor express > extreme skepticism when discussing IP address plans and work I had done. > When describing why I went with an IPv6 only solution for this setup, he > responded, "Why not just get more IPv4 addresses? Just go back to > IANA[sic] for more if you don't have enough already." > > OK, maybe it's not *just* marketing, but marketing (using the term > broadly) is still a very large part of it. > > your example sounds like ignorance, not marketing.
