[arin-ppml] Is this more desired than aTransferPolicy? Needinput

[Matthew Petach]

On 11/19/08, Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm at ipinc.net> wrote:
...
> I simply disagree.  You have to do the same amount of application
>  conformance
>  testing when your going to a new Windows OS.  Consider the millions of
>  bucks these companies are paying Microsoft every year for their MS
>  site licenses.  IPv6 rollouts require NO licensing fees!

Can you point me to Cisco and Juniper software images that
support IPv6 that do not require additional licensing costs
over what the IPv4-only software version costs?  All the versions
I've looked at so far, the IPv6 capable software is different from
the IPv4 software, and getting IPv6 functionality requires
paying additional license fees, which is a stumbling point
for a lot of sites.  I think until we can remove these artificial
hurdles in the path of IPv6 deployments, we're going to see
a lot of resistance towards moving to IPv6 due to increased
costs associated with trying to deploy IPv6.

For some products, in fact, vendors are actively *removing*
IPv6 support.  In the past, I would have been able to get
IPv6 images for the routers I use at home; but Cisco has
removed all IPv6 support for the product line, and has made
it impossible for me to run IPv6 on it now, even though at
one time they did offer versions of IOS for it that supported
IPv6.  These types of hurdles make deploying IPv6 an uphill
battle for many people.  So we really do need to look at
what other possible scenarios there are, other than just
assuming everyone will simply move to IPv6.

Matt