RE: v6ops:IPv4 vs. IPv6 operational costs

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

On Wed, 23 Nov 2005, Dwight Jamieson wrote:
> Looking a few years down the road, assuming that bulk of the bleeding is
> over, will operating that network be simpler, easier, cheaper than
> operating a network with private addressing today?

Once that point is reached, I'd suspect so.  There's also an 
alternative or a variation: keep using the existing v4 infrastructure 
(for simpler applications), but introduce the new apps to (only) v6.

> How painful is introducing new applications behind NAT/ALGs? What
> percentage of an IT department's budget spent on issues relating to
> private addressing?

That's a good question.  I'd guess that getting non-trivial apps 
(e.g., VoIP, video conferencing, etc.) to work across NATs is 
non-trivial exercise.  I'd guess that most cost is borne by those 
folks who write and need to support those applications.  That includes 
the enterprise if the app is important enough to the enterprise.

--
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings