IPv6 networking: Bad news for small biz ### You may not get fired for buying Cisco, but you can go bust http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/03/31/ipv6_sucks_for_smes/ >From the comments the author opines (among other things): <quote> The article exists for one reason: to let the high priests of the internet know “oh, BTW, that NPT66 thing that? It’s in products and in use in SME shops all over the damned place already.” In other words: the utter failure of the priesthood to engage care for the issues faced by SME outfits resulted in them (shockingly!) going out and choosing the cheap and simple alternative that actually already existed! Note the two key words: “cheap” and “simple.” </quote> That's us he's talking about. It seemed only fair to share that perspective, since I don't see any other mention of the article here. Needless to say, I really can't speak in polite terms of some of the shortsightedness demonstrated. But of course, I'm always delighted to hear your opinions. Is renumbering *really* that big of a deal? I suppose multihoming is the bigger, more serious concern - that's the one we see no viable solution but NAT for, given small site constraints and aggregation. And yet, here we are, on our way to flipping the big switch, and nobody seems to be in much of a panic. I do not operate on sites large enough, or disaster-resistant enough, to know one way or the other how big of an issue this really is. My gut feeling is that this article is not the whole story and that the author has worked up a good whinge. But I do think the belligerent attitude in this article says we won't be long finding out just how far a NAT-free existence will get us. Especially true given how much blame we get for "Not thinking it through properly" or, worse, directly compared with OSI protocols with all those fancy network path discovery features that we felt we didn't need, application-layer DNS kludges for failover, etc, that would have remediated these problems if the naysayers are to be believed. No doubt there's work to be done. I see already the progress made in v6ops of IPv6 multihoming without NAT. Cool. And, of course, there's HomeNet for putting the title of this article into question. Cheers, Sabahattin