>
> Ouch. It's a bit late in the game to be starting the info gathering. I
> hope the network is not large.
It's a manageable number. We are tying this in with hardware upgrade as well so we will basically be building scratch environment and then migrating data over (which we have done a lot of in the past).
> There is a side benefit to the absence of service names. You can combine
> the two migrations so the new names can start with IPv6-enabled and old
> legacy systems that can't be converted yet use the old NAT names. This way
> you can avoid the whole annoyance of migrating to intermediary ipv6.foo
> names during initial production testing then migrating a second time back
> to the normal names.
>
> AYJ
That gives me something to think about. I will have to play around with the naming to see what's going to work best.
Thanks everyone for the information.
Gary Smith
��.n��������+%������w��{.n����z���)�� jg��� �����ݢj����G���� ���j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥
