On 12/6/18 1:47 PM, Noureddine IDBOUFKER via AfrIPv6-Discuss wrote:
Sure there are many opportunities behind Transition to IPv6 but
unfortunately, for African Operators in each country, there is also a
risk. Every day elapsed before this transition moves them towards a
very risky situation. I
Sure there are many opportunities behind Transition to IPv6 but unfortunately,
for African Operators in each country, there is also a risk. Every day elapsed
before this transition moves them towards a very risky situation. I talk about
Business and also technical risks. Unfortunately, the
On 12/6/18 5:22 AM, Noureddine IDBOUFKER via AfrIPv6-Discuss wrote:
I think that Top management is not enough *aware *of business
opportunities behind IPv6 migration.
Sure IPv6 will give them the opportunity to address a high number of
objects, equipements, services, but it is not limited
This is a good point. IPv6, like the Internet itself, benefits from the
"network effect," where it is more valuable as more people use it.
A telecom regulator can call a meeting of ISPs, mobile carriers, web
hosts, IXP, the NREN or university, and maybe a few large companies,
kick off with a
Hi,
I would like to see people NOT deploy IPv6 - rather use the more costly
CGN method of keeping your IPv4 address space going. Services you supply
will cost more but no worries - just pass your costs on to your
customers. In time, your
customers may find they can't get to every Web Site because
On 6 Dec 2018, 14:57 +0400, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ ,
wrote:
>
> My experience shows that usually engineers are aware (they may have the
> complete knowledge or not, but they know that they need to do IPv6), but in
> most organizations, executive management don’t pay attention to what their
> own
Note that is not a migration, this is one of the first mistakes. It is a
transition and coexistence. We really need to talk with the proper terminology
or we will confuse others. The IETF never did any “migration” protocol, all
them are “transition and coexistence”.
You don’t “disable” IPv4
I also agree somehow what Mukom said before, but not 100% agreement I guess.
Let me explain.
Governments need to setup rules to mandate IPv6 in the public sector. This is
easy to say, but believe me, there is not a generic “law” for every country.
I’ve worked for several governments on this.
I think that Top management is not enough aware of business opportunities
behind IPv6 migration. Sure IPv6 will give them the opportunity to address a
high number of objects, equipements, services, but it is not limited to
that. Top management has to encourage their people to be express
Thank you Jordi,
I think we need to go in this direction for operators to switch to IPv6 as soon
as possible .
Best regards,
Pascal Heriliva ANDRIANISA
Webmaster i RENALA
R esearch and E ducation N etwork for A cademic and L earning A ctivities - [
http://www.irenala.edu.mg/ |
Operators are informed, if you speak about “engineers”, the problem is to
inform the CEOs of operator AND the CEOs of important companies in each country
(financial sectors, companies that export or have relevant web sites, etc.).
I recall ARIN did sent a letter to them (in their region) a
Dear All,
I think there is also another solution which is to inform the operators in each
country of the situation because if only the members who will apply IPv6 it
will not be possible to use it optimally.
I do not know if a provision to that effect has already been taken but I think
that
12 matches
Mail list logo
