On 12/19/17, 11:52 PM, "NANOG on behalf of Mark Andrews" <nanog-boun...@nanog.org on behalf of ma...@isc.org> wrote:
> >> On 20 Dec 2017, at 2:39 am, Livingood, Jason >><jason_living...@comcast.com> wrote: >> >> On 12/18/17, 2:36 PM, "NANOG on behalf of Harald Koch" >><nanog-boun...@nanog.org on behalf of c...@pobox.com> wrote: >>> They could use IPv6. I mean, if the mobile phone companies can figure >>>it out, surely an ISP can... >> >> Except for cases when it is impossible or impractical to update >>software on a great number of legacy devices… >> >> JL > >You mean devices where the manufacture ignore IPv6 and shipped you a dud. > Even devices with a 15 year life cycle should be IPv6 capable today. “should” doesn’t buy developer cycles, especially for EOL products or from bankrupt vendors. You deal with the network you have, upgrade what you can, and replace the rest as fast as you can while doing what it takes to stay in business. Lee
