Re: Why is your company treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales matter?

2010-11-19 Thread Pierfrancesco Caci
:- William == William Herrin b...@herrin.us writes:

 Hiya folks,
 Why are your respective companies treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales
 matter instead of a standard technical change request like IP
 addresses or BGP? Sprint and Qwest, I know you're guilty. How many of
 the rest of you are making IPv6 installation harder for your customers
 than it needs to be?


For us, SLAs are not guaranteed for IPv6 yet, hence we want customers to
acknowledge that. This is bound to change sometime in the near future
of course. 



Pf



-- 


---
 Pierfrancesco Caci | Network  System Administrator - INOC-DBA: 6762*PFC
 p.c...@seabone.net | Telecom Italia Sparkle - http://etabeta.noc.seabone.net/



Re: Why is your company treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales matter?

2010-11-19 Thread Jay Hennigan
On 11/18/10 2:24 PM, George, Wes E [NTK] wrote:

 [WES] Because in most companies, sales owns the direct relationship with the
 customer, so when they ask about a new feature or service, they work with
 sales, and sales gets the right technical folks involved. A clarification
 that is probably important here: a sales matter != extra charges for
 IPv6 at least at my employer,...

And therein lies the problem.  By punting technical provisioning tasks
to sales, if it is != extra charges, you're virtually guaranteeing
that the sales people won't put any effort into making it happen.

Salespeople are driven by commissions (carrot) and quotas (stick).  When
salespeople have to divide their time between tasks that don't
contribute to commission or quota and those that do, guess which gets
done first and which last.

I'm not pointing fingers at Sprint or Wes.  This is a generic problem.
We've been guilty of it too from time to time.  If it's a matter of data
entry or filling out a form, have a secretary do it or make the form
available online.

--
Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - j...@impulse.net
Impulse Internet Service  -  http://www.impulse.net/
Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV



Re: Why is your company treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales matter?

2010-11-19 Thread Robert E. Seastrom

George, Wes E [NTK] wesley.e.geo...@sprint.com writes:

  Sprint and Qwest, I know you're guilty.

 Bill, I know that you mean well and you're just trying to push IPv6
 deployment, and sometimes a little public shame goes a long way, but in the
 future, before you call my company out in public with tenuous assertions
 like this, please at least try to reach out to me privately to address your
 perceived issue with the way Sprint is handling IPv6 rollout? It's not like
 I'm hard to find, even if it's a blast message to NANOG that looks like
 Will someone with IPv6 clue at Sprint contact me?

I totally sympathize with the please don't bash us in public
sentiment, but holler on NANOG does not scale.  If the intent is to
be selling IPv6 to the great unwashed masses (a laudable goal if you
want to continue to grow post-v4-runout), it's got to be no more
difficult than getting IPv4.  Needs to be productized in such a way
that the default case is that you get both, and if you don't turn on
the v6, well, shame on you.

-r




Why is your company treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales matter?

2010-11-18 Thread William Herrin
Hiya folks,

Why are your respective companies treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales
matter instead of a standard technical change request like IP
addresses or BGP? Sprint and Qwest, I know you're guilty. How many of
the rest of you are making IPv6 installation harder for your customers
than it needs to be?

Regards,
Bill Herrin


-- 
William D. Herrin  her...@dirtside.com  b...@herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. .. Web: http://bill.herrin.us/
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004



Re: Why is your company treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales matter?

2010-11-18 Thread Seth Mattinen
On 11/18/2010 11:06, William Herrin wrote:
 Hiya folks,
 
 Why are your respective companies treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales
 matter instead of a standard technical change request like IP
 addresses or BGP? Sprint and Qwest, I know you're guilty. How many of
 the rest of you are making IPv6 installation harder for your customers
 than it needs to be?
 

My IPv6 dealings with Sprint have been purely technical from all
aspects. If you were to ask about, say, Verizon; well, check the
archives for my failed experience. =)

~Seth



RE: Why is your company treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales matter?

2010-11-18 Thread Paul Stewart
We treat it as a technical request - a MAC of sorts.  The only time we would 
treat it as a sales matter is when the customer requires technical assistance 
with their configuration or network design (different matter).

Paul


-Original Message-
From: William Herrin [mailto:b...@herrin.us] 
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 2:06 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Why is your company treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales matter?

Hiya folks,

Why are your respective companies treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales
matter instead of a standard technical change request like IP
addresses or BGP? Sprint and Qwest, I know you're guilty. How many of
the rest of you are making IPv6 installation harder for your customers
than it needs to be?

Regards,
Bill Herrin


-- 
William D. Herrin  her...@dirtside.com  b...@herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. .. Web: http://bill.herrin.us/
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004




Re: Why is your company treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales matter?

2010-11-18 Thread Owen DeLong
Not us... We're making it about as easy as possible. In many cases,
we offer discounts for dual-stacking.

Owen

On Nov 18, 2010, at 11:06 AM, William Herrin wrote:

 Hiya folks,
 
 Why are your respective companies treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales
 matter instead of a standard technical change request like IP
 addresses or BGP? Sprint and Qwest, I know you're guilty. How many of
 the rest of you are making IPv6 installation harder for your customers
 than it needs to be?
 
 Regards,
 Bill Herrin
 
 
 -- 
 William D. Herrin  her...@dirtside.com  b...@herrin.us
 3005 Crane Dr. .. Web: http://bill.herrin.us/
 Falls Church, VA 22042-3004




Re: Why is your company treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales matter?

2010-11-18 Thread Jack Bates
Pricing hasn't been an issue when I've dealt with them. It's been more 
of a Have your account manager issue the order so we can make the 
appropriate changes. which is just a business process and not unexpected.


Only reason I don't have v6 on Qwest is that I'm connected to a Juniper 
and I didn't want to be moved to a Cisco to support it. When they 
support v6 to customers on the Juniper, I will have the paperwork done.


Jack

On 11/18/2010 1:06 PM, William Herrin wrote:

Hiya folks,

Why are your respective companies treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales
matter instead of a standard technical change request like IP
addresses or BGP? Sprint and Qwest, I know you're guilty. How many of
the rest of you are making IPv6 installation harder for your customers
than it needs to be?

Regards,
Bill Herrin






RE: Why is your company treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales matter?

2010-11-18 Thread Ryan Finnesey
Sprint keeps telling us they do not yet support IPv6.  Is this not the
case?

-Original Message-
From: Seth Mattinen [mailto:se...@rollernet.us] 
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 2:12 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Why is your company treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales
matter?

On 11/18/2010 11:06, William Herrin wrote:
 Hiya folks,
 
 Why are your respective companies treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales 
 matter instead of a standard technical change request like IP 
 addresses or BGP? Sprint and Qwest, I know you're guilty. How many of 
 the rest of you are making IPv6 installation harder for your customers

 than it needs to be?
 

My IPv6 dealings with Sprint have been purely technical from all
aspects. If you were to ask about, say, Verizon; well, check the
archives for my failed experience. =)

~Seth




Re: Why is your company treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales matter?

2010-11-18 Thread Daniel Roesen
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 02:10:56PM -0800, Ryan Finnesey wrote:
 Sprint keeps telling us they do not yet support IPv6.

http://www.sprintv6.net/sprintlink_ipv6_overview.html

Best regards,
Daniel

-- 
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: d...@cluenet.de -- d...@ircnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0



RE: Why is your company treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales matter?

2010-11-18 Thread George, Wes E [NTK]
 -Original Message-
 From: William Herrin [mailto:b...@herrin.us]
 Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 2:06 PM
 
 Why are your respective companies treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales
 matter instead of a standard technical change request like IP
 addresses or BGP? 
[WES] Because in most companies, sales owns the direct relationship with the
customer, so when they ask about a new feature or service, they work with
sales, and sales gets the right technical folks involved. A clarification
that is probably important here: a sales matter != extra charges for
IPv6 at least at my employer, so if you believe that is why it's being
referred to sales, I ask that you not jump to conclusions. Eventually, this
is something that can be accomplished solely through a portal like any other
technical change request, but short term, we wanted to focus on making our
IPv6 availability as wide as possible and as soon as possible. That requires
a bit more handholding, and sometimes a manual process here and there, which
involves sales. 

Sprint and Qwest, I know you're guilty.
[WES] Bill, I know that you mean well and you're just trying to push IPv6
deployment, and sometimes a little public shame goes a long way, but in the
future, before you call my company out in public with tenuous assertions
like this, please at least try to reach out to me privately to address your
perceived issue with the way Sprint is handling IPv6 rollout? It's not like
I'm hard to find, even if it's a blast message to NANOG that looks like
Will someone with IPv6 clue at Sprint contact me?
 
 How many of
 the rest of you are making IPv6 installation harder for your customers
 than it needs to be?
[WES] I guess that depends on who you talk to and their definition of hard.
Obviously you feel that there's some problem, so feel free to provide
details specific to Sprint off-list and I'll do my best to address them.

Wes George 
Token Sprint whipping boy and IPv6 mechanic
http://www.sprintv6.net



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature


Re: Why is your company treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales matter?

2010-11-18 Thread Seth Mattinen
On 11/18/2010 14:10, Ryan Finnesey wrote:
 Sprint keeps telling us they do not yet support IPv6.  Is this not the
 case?
 


I'd say that's not completely true. IPv6 is not available everywhere on
the edge of 1239, but it is available. Contact your rep and place an SCA
request for dual stack on your port so you are on the radar.

~Seth



Re: Why is your company treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales matter?

2010-11-18 Thread Seth Mattinen
On 11/18/2010 14:24, George, Wes E [NTK] wrote:
 [WES] Bill, I know that you mean well and you're just trying to push IPv6
 deployment, and sometimes a little public shame goes a long way, but in the
 future, before you call my company out in public with tenuous assertions
 like this, please at least try to reach out to me privately to address your
 perceived issue with the way Sprint is handling IPv6 rollout? It's not like
 I'm hard to find, even if it's a blast message to NANOG that looks like
 Will someone with IPv6 clue at Sprint contact me?
  

Me, personally, I have had absolutely zero issues with Sprint and
requesting IPv6. The process was extremely smooth and at no point did my
rep or their support engineers ever tell me it was not available. There
was an easy questionnaire I had to fill out, but that was it.

~Seth



Re: Why is your company treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales matter?

2010-11-18 Thread William Herrin
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 5:24 PM, George, Wes E [NTK]
wesley.e.geo...@sprint.com wrote:
Sprint and Qwest, I know you're guilty.
 [WES] Bill, I know that you mean well and you're just trying to push IPv6
 deployment, and sometimes a little public shame goes a long way, but in the
 future, before you call my company out in public with tenuous assertions
 like this, please at least try to reach out to me privately to address your
 perceived issue with the way Sprint is handling IPv6 rollout? It's not like
 I'm hard to find, even if it's a blast message to NANOG that looks like
 Will someone with IPv6 clue at Sprint contact me?

Hi Wes,

I apologize for singling you out. I brought the subject up after
getting the same, what I thought decidedly odd response to my IPv6
turn up request from more than one upstream.

My point was this: if IPv6 is the next Internet protocol then at some
point in the very near future it is a -standard- component of -every-
product you're paid for. Not a new feature customers may order. At
worst it's like requesting IP addresses - an included component
configurable with a tech support ticket.

For those of you whose companies are not yet treating IPv6 as a
-standard- service (at least where available), carefully consider why
not.


Also, bear in mind that as an end user, we know where to find the tech
support system 'cause the lines break at 3 am and I have you on speed
dial. We may not have talked to our sales rep in a year or more. In
some cases (Verizon) I don't have the foggiest idea who my current
account rep is.

If I'm asked to sign papers (as some folks have reported for some
carriers) that's enough of a barrier that I probably won't turn up
IPv6 right now. It's not about the dollars. If it has to be signed, it
has to be vetted by legal. Intentionally asking legal to closely
examine my activities is a little like going to the doctor --
necessary and often helpful but sometimes the prescription is a rectal
exam.

Don't get me wrong. I'd love to hear from my account rep about how
you're ready to turn up IPv6 on my line at my convenience and oh by
the way check out our wonderful new products for sale. But when I have
to track the rep down and treat IPv6 as a new product rather than a
configuration change, that's a hassle which leaves me with a negative
feelings about your company.

Regards,
Bill Herrin



-- 
William D. Herrin  her...@dirtside.com  b...@herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. .. Web: http://bill.herrin.us/
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004



RE: Why is your company treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales matter?

2010-11-18 Thread George Bonser
 
 My point was this: if IPv6 is the next Internet protocol then at some
 point in the very near future it is a -standard- component of -every-
 product you're paid for. Not a new feature customers may order. At
 worst it's like requesting IP addresses - an included component
 configurable with a tech support ticket.


Exactly.  Actually, I would go one step farther, if you don't have
native v6 as a standard feature, you aren't offering Tier 1 (whatever
that is) internet access and are offering only a subset of the Internet.
There really isn't an excuse for the major providers not to be
ubiquitous v6 native at this point.  I agree, v6 should be standard
internet, not anything special or premium.  In fact, customers should
be demanding discounts for v4 only service.  It just isn't worth paying
good money for substandard capability.





Re: Why is your company treating IPv6 turn ups as a sales matter?

2010-11-18 Thread Jay Hennigan
On 11/18/10 11:12 AM, Seth Mattinen wrote:

 My IPv6 dealings with Sprint have been purely technical from all
 aspects. If you were to ask about, say, Verizon; well, check the
 archives for my failed experience. =)

Not here.  We've been on their tunneled AS6175 network for some time and
now they're making us jump through sales hoops to get native AS1239
dual-stack.

--
Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - j...@impulse.net
Impulse Internet Service  -  http://www.impulse.net/
Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV