Home
Vendor
Project
  Phase I
Press
  Phase I
About
You Are Using IPv4 To Access This Site
Your IP Address is: 38.103.63.55

RE: [moonv6] RE: [nav6tf] RTI Article on IPv6 Cost and Deployment

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Attachment view

From: Vodinh, Hai (hai_vodinh@alliedtelesyn.com)
Date: 02/06/06


moonv6 post from "Vodinh, Hai" <hai_vodinh@alliedtelesyn.com> Please read the report closely. Here is a direct quote from the report from the executive summary page ES-4 assigning the main cost to labor, primarily training:

" Interviews with stakeholders indicated that hardware and software costs to upgrade to IPv6 will be negligible for the majority of Internet users because IPv6 capabilities will be deployed as part of routine upgrade cycles. Over the next 4 or 5 years, the majority of network hardware, operating systems, and network-enabled software packages (e.g., databases, email) sold will include IPv6 capabilities.

As a result, labor costs will constitute the majority of the cost of upgrading to IPv6 for users, and training will constitute the majority of these additional labor costs. Training on the fundamentals and implementation of the IPv6 protocol will depend on individual staff's relative needs based on past experience with IPv4 and potential future applications."

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-moonv6@io.iol.unh.edu [mailto:owner-moonv6@io.iol.unh.edu] On Behalf Of JORDI PALET MARTINEZ Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2006 3:53 AM
To: Kopko, Tom; Yurie Rich; Bound, Jim; carlw@mcsr-labs.org; vint@google.com; nav6tf@ipv6forum.com; moonv6@iol.unh.edu; browe@rti.org Subject: Re: [moonv6] RE: [nav6tf] RTI Article on IPv6 Cost and Deployment

moonv6 post from JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es> I think this is a very good example, and I'm sure other big operators can provide similar ones.

I've been working with more than 180 ISPs in all the regions in the last 6 months, and there has been never a situation which was so expensive as RTI figures point out.

The main cost is the training. Other costs are typically memory upgrades (may be also firmware upgrade) for the routers.

Is difficult to find ISPs which have so old routers that can't be upgraded meaning a full replacement is required and if that's the case, usually is done *NOT* because IPv6, but because the network need to increase bandwidth capacities, support for new line cards or other functionalities.

IPv6 comes basically as a value added if the network maintenance is correctly planned.

If you don't plan ahead, it may happen that you buy equipment that doesn't come with IPv6, but seriously, do you really believe there is today anymore in the market any "serious" vendors which doesn't provide IPv6 (or which will be provided by some new software in the short-term) ?

So even if you don't "buy" IPv6, you will get it.

RTI article is probably right if you invest *JUST* to get IPv6 overnight, or if you put aside all the other reasons for getting new equipment or upgrading what you have.

I think is key we elaborate about this and pass the right message, no need to say RTI is wrong or whatever like that, but getting everything in the right context.

If RTI is interested in cooperating on this, I think that will be excellent and I will be happy to work on the document also.

Apps just work when you add IPv6. They may not be taking advantage of IPv6, but porting or making new apps for IPv6 is not an IPv6 cost, is just making new apps for taking advantage of a new technology, something that we have been doing for years with every new service.

For example, a making a web or mail server is not an IP cost. We have both of them today working with IPv4, and there is almost no any "real" advantage in getting them supporting IPv6, but in any case, they still work with IPv4, so the cost of getting them to work with the deployment of IPv6 is *ZERO*. If we want to take advantage of IPv6 for mail or web services, then is not an IPv6 cost, is cost for new services or functionalities. And by the way, we know that porting mail and web servers to IPv6 has been peanuts.

The major cost is probably the access networks which have low cost CPEs, and this is cost that will be covered by residential users. I'm talking about CPEs that will come to the market with IPv6 support below 50-70 USDs or so, of course, not just with IPv6, but new functionalities, other link layer technologies, etc. And the users will buy it for other reasons (services, applications, triple play, higher speeds, etc.), not just because IPv6. In this case I don't think is a cost for the ISPs, but for end users, as most of the case, this device comes as a "gift" from the ISP or is owned by the end user directly (depending on business model/regions). For example, if we assume around 225 M broadband lines in all the world (not sure if this is a right figure, but I think is the last estimation I heard from Point Topic), in the worst case, assuming 100 USD per each installed CPE:

225.000.000 x 100 = 2.250.000.000

It makes a big difference (for all the world) vs. 25B, right ?

This is not the case for enterprise customers, as most of them have routers that can also be upgraded to support IPv6, may be just a question of memory, but typically only firmware version.

And of course, OSs come with IPv6 since 2-3 years ago at no extra cost.

Regards,
Jordi

> De: "Kopko, Tom" <Tom.Kopko@globalcrossing.com> Responder a:
> <owner-moonv6@io.iol.unh.edu>
> Fecha: Sat, 4 Feb 2006 23:39:24 -0500
> Para: <yrich@native6.com>, "Bound, Jim" <Jim.Bound@hp.com>,
> <carlw@mcsr-labs.org>, <vint@google.com>, <nav6tf@ipv6forum.com>,
> <moonv6@iol.unh.edu>, <browe@rti.org>
> Conversación: [moonv6] RE: [nav6tf] RTI Article on IPv6 Cost and
> Deployment
> Asunto: RE: [moonv6] RE: [nav6tf] RTI Article on IPv6 Cost and
> Deployment
>
> moonv6 post from "Kopko, Tom" <Tom.Kopko@GlobalCrossing.com> Agree
> with Vint about not over-burdening and especially Yurie about ROI.
> The US gov is debating the exact same issues. More and more are
> realizing that v6 and IP everywhere will change economics, improve
> efficiencies, and enable exciting new capabilities.
>
> Global Crossing Telecom (the US $2 billion Tier 1 ISP and carrier
> reaching 600 cities on 6 continents) has IPv6 and dual stacked v4/v6
> fully available worldwide as a standard option for IP and IPVPN
> services. Working and interworking Juniper and Cisco. Took some
> time, effort, and $$, but not that much either.
>
> Tom Kopko
> Global Crossing Telecommunications, Inc.
> 12010 Sunset Hills Road, Suite 420
> Reston, VA 20190
> USA
 > +1 571.264.0370 mobile
> +1 703.464.3352 office
> tom.kopko@globalcrossing.com
> www.globalcrossing.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-moonv6@io.iol.unh.edu [mailto:owner-moonv6@io.iol.unh.edu]
> On Behalf Of Yurie Rich
> Sent: Saturday, February 04, 2006 11:21 PM
> To: 'Bound, Jim'; carlw@mcsr-labs.org; vint@google.com;
> nav6tf@ipv6forum.com; moonv6@iol.unh.edu; browe@rti.org
> Subject: [moonv6] RE: [nav6tf] RTI Article on IPv6 Cost and Deployment
>
> moonv6 post from "Yurie Rich" <yrich@native6.com> There is a serious
> disconnect though when we only look at the cost side of the equation.
> Certainly there will be a cost with transition. But there will also
> be benefits not available in today's networks. So there is the
> positive side of the equation. We need to be sure to promote the
> positive ROI aspect of leveraging v6 benefits.
>
>
> Also, as Vint pointed out, we need to be cautious about what costs we
> allocate to transition, versus just normal refresh costs. Its
> disingenuous
> to say, "Hey we bought a new router for our MPLS deployment. AND it
> does
> v6. Let's add that to the cost of v6 integration." If organizations
> routinely upgrade their network, then those costs are simply the costs
> of
> doing business NOT adopting IPv6 - that is a side benefit.
>
> -Yurie
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nav6tf@ipv6forum.com [mailto:owner-nav6tf@ipv6forum.com] On
> Behalf Of Bound, Jim
> Sent: Saturday, February 04, 2006 7:21 PM
> To: carlw@mcsr-labs.org; vint@google.com; nav6tf@ipv6forum.com;
> moonv6@iol.unh.edu; browe@rti.org
> Subject: RE: [nav6tf] RTI Article on IPv6 Cost and Deployment
>
> Good point Carl. Moving to that which we don't have with IPv4 is a cost
> to get there.
> /jim
> 

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: carlw@mcsr-labs.org [mailto:carlw@mcsr-labs.org]
>> Sent: Saturday, February 04, 2006 10:14 PM
>> To: Bound, Jim; vint@google.com; nav6tf@ipv6forum.com;
>> moonv6@iol.unh.edu; browe@rti.org
>> Subject: RE: [nav6tf] RTI Article on IPv6 Cost and Deployment
>> 
>> 
>> Also there is training costs and building new applications to use new
>> IPv6 paradigm - in particular those for a wireless Internet that has
>> Ubiquitous Mobility connectivity. (something we don't have
>> with the IPv4
>> Internet).
>> 
>> Carl
>> 
>> Original Message:
>> -----------------
>> From: Bound, Jim Jim.Bound@hp.com
>> Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2006 21:48:05 -0500
>> To: vint@google.com, nav6tf@ipv6forum.com,
>> moonv6@iol.unh.edu, browe@rti.org
>> Subject: RE: [nav6tf] RTI Article on IPv6 Cost and Deployment
>> 
>> 
>> Good point of granularity.  In my mind was including not just
>> government
>> but industry too, and recurring maintenance/services costs across the
>> U.S.  Also all the next development for IPv6, all the embedded systems
>> that require hardware upgrade in multiple markets (Cable Modems, Cell
>> Phones, Mission Critical Hardware Networking Components), all the
>> applications that have to be ported, and all the future work it will
>> take to move to an end-to-end IPv6 model. I don't think it is possible
>> to estimate what is IPv6 cost to transition and what is the
>> cost to add
>> all that which will use the benefits from IPv6 that are not
>> IPv6 per se.
>> That is not a lot of money for a networking cost across all
>> of industry
>> and government per year, but how much of that is related to IPv6 is an
>> interesting question?  Mail from Philip was assuming the upgrades too.
>> 
>> I have copied Brent Rowe from RTI to see if he can shed some
>> thoughts on
>> the 25 billion, NAv6TF members have been part of the Interview process
>> for RTI studies, but not for the business costs.
>> 
>> NB: Brent: This is the NAv6TF list you know well from the
>> SMEs you have
>> worked with.  Can you break down for us the 25 billion?  I thought it
>> reasonable but was thinking all that would happen because of IPv6, but
>> when you see how Vint puts it as 1 billion a year clearly that seems
>> high?  How did you get to the 25 billion?  Don't need to share sources
>> or anything like that but it must have some break down you
>> can share to
>> state it in a quote in the interview below. Thanks.
>> 
>> /jim
>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Vint Cerf [mailto:vint@google.com]
>>> Sent: Saturday, February 04, 2006 9:08 PM
>>> To: Bound, Jim; nav6tf@ipv6forum.com
>>> Cc: moonv6@iol.unh.edu
>>> Subject: RE: [nav6tf] RTI Article on IPv6 Cost and Deployment
>>> 
>>> A billion dollars a year? Sounds pretty high to me - there
>>> will be a lot of
>>> stuff purchased during the next 25 years and a lot of it will
>>> come with IPv6
>>> but to saddle every purchase with "cost of upgrading to IPv6"
>>> seems off the
>>> mark.
>>> 
>>> Vint
>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Vinton G Cerf
>>> Chief Internet Evangelist
>>> Google/Regus
>>> Suite 384
>>> 13800 Coppermine Road
>>> Herndon, VA 20171
>>>  
>>> +1 703 234-1823
>>> +1 703-234-5822 (f)
>>>  
>>> vint@google.com
>>> www.google.com
>>>  
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-nav6tf@ipv6forum.com
>>> [mailto:owner-nav6tf@ipv6forum.com] On
>>> Behalf Of Bound, Jim
>>> Sent: Saturday, February 04, 2006 8:31 AM
>>> To: nav6tf@ipv6forum.com
>>> Cc: moonv6@iol.unh.edu
>>> Subject: [nav6tf] RTI Article on IPv6 Cost and Deployment
>>> 
>>> This sounds reasonable to me.
>>> 
>>> /jim
>>>  
>>> http://triangle.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2006/01/30/da
>>> ily41.php?jst=b_ln_hl
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> mail2web - Check your email from the web at
>> http://mail2web.com/ .
>> 
>> 
>>

>
>

The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org

Barcelona 2005 Global IPv6 Summit
Slides available at:
http://www.ipv6-es.com

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Attachment view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : 12/01/06 EST