Comments on: IPv4 Justification Changes in IMS http://blog.softlayer.com/2011/ipv4-justification-changes-in-ims/ A Behind the Scenes Look at the Best Hosting Provider in the World Wed, 22 May 2013 17:40:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1 By: Peter M Abraham http://blog.softlayer.com/2011/ipv4-justification-changes-in-ims/comment-page-1/#comment-37691 Peter M Abraham Mon, 02 Apr 2012 13:29:12 +0000 http://blog.softlayer.com/2011/#comment-37691 IPv4 shortage – impact on ISP’s, data centers, hosting providers, and you --> http://www.dynamicnet.net/2012/04/ipv4-shortage-impact-isps-data-centers-hosting-providers/ is where we find ourselves at present. IPv4 shortage – impact on ISP’s, data centers, hosting providers, and you –>
http://www.dynamicnet.net/2012/04/ipv4-shortage-impact-isps-data-centers-hosting-providers/ is where we find ourselves at present.

]]> By: Kevin Hazard http://blog.softlayer.com/2011/ipv4-justification-changes-in-ims/comment-page-1/#comment-26017 Kevin Hazard Tue, 31 May 2011 17:03:18 +0000 http://blog.softlayer.com/2011/#comment-26017 If you look at the recent news from one of our competitors, they just announced IPv6 capabilities last week after three years and $10 million in R&D and hardware upgrades: http://sftlyr.com/8b ... The work required to get legacy servers from The Planet would have probably required a similar investment of time and money, and because all new server orders would be provisioned on the SoftLayer platform, the benefits of that retrofitted system couldn't have really been paid for by the new servers those capabilities may have attracted. The difficulty in incorporating IPv6 on The Planet platform is that every piece of network hardware has to support IPv6, and in The Planet's data centers, many of our routers and switches didn't, so they would have had to be completely replaced. The odds of all of the customers wanting IPv6 on their server being in the same data center (or much less the same rack) were miniscule, so to meet the relatively low demand, a network-wide replacement would have had to happen. If every customer was clamoring for IPv6, the discussion may have been different. As a result, we decided the best way to support customers on the legacy infrastructure who needed those other capabilities would be to help those customers get onto the SoftLayer platform. The decision shouldn't suggest that the legacy TP customers or their requests were any less valuable; rather the dollars and cents of what it would cost to enable things like IPv6 on a platform that would be growing just wasn't economically feasible. If there were any way to easily incorporate those features in the legacy TP architecture, we most certainly would have done so. If you look at the recent news from one of our competitors, they just announced IPv6 capabilities last week after three years and $10 million in R&D and hardware upgrades: http://sftlyr.com/8b … The work required to get legacy servers from The Planet would have probably required a similar investment of time and money, and because all new server orders would be provisioned on the SoftLayer platform, the benefits of that retrofitted system couldn’t have really been paid for by the new servers those capabilities may have attracted.

The difficulty in incorporating IPv6 on The Planet platform is that every piece of network hardware has to support IPv6, and in The Planet’s data centers, many of our routers and switches didn’t, so they would have had to be completely replaced. The odds of all of the customers wanting IPv6 on their server being in the same data center (or much less the same rack) were miniscule, so to meet the relatively low demand, a network-wide replacement would have had to happen. If every customer was clamoring for IPv6, the discussion may have been different.

As a result, we decided the best way to support customers on the legacy infrastructure who needed those other capabilities would be to help those customers get onto the SoftLayer platform. The decision shouldn’t suggest that the legacy TP customers or their requests were any less valuable; rather the dollars and cents of what it would cost to enable things like IPv6 on a platform that would be growing just wasn’t economically feasible. If there were any way to easily incorporate those features in the legacy TP architecture, we most certainly would have done so.

]]> By: Jon http://blog.softlayer.com/2011/ipv4-justification-changes-in-ims/comment-page-1/#comment-25987 Jon Tue, 31 May 2011 08:48:18 +0000 http://blog.softlayer.com/2011/#comment-25987 "The SoftLayer network is enabled for IPv6, and you may place an order for 18.4 quintillion free IPv6 addresses for your server via our web portal today!" Unless you're like me and are a former The Planet customer who was acquired in the merger. In that case you're left blowing in the wind: Jimmy V: The Planet servers are not compatible with IPv6 Jimmy V: only Servers on the SoftLayer Platform have the Ipv6 capability you: Do you know when they will be? Jimmy V: IPv6 will not be available on the Planet platform “The SoftLayer network is enabled for IPv6, and you may place an order for 18.4 quintillion free IPv6 addresses for your server via our web portal today!”

Unless you’re like me and are a former The Planet customer who was acquired in the merger. In that case you’re left blowing in the wind:
Jimmy V: The Planet servers are not compatible with IPv6
Jimmy V: only Servers on the SoftLayer Platform have the Ipv6 capability
you: Do you know when they will be?
Jimmy V: IPv6 will not be available on the Planet platform

]]> By: Tom http://blog.softlayer.com/2011/ipv4-justification-changes-in-ims/comment-page-1/#comment-25507 Tom Thu, 26 May 2011 20:22:21 +0000 http://blog.softlayer.com/2011/#comment-25507 Cool, I've always wanted 18.4 quintillion IPv6 addresses for my server! Cool, I’ve always wanted 18.4 quintillion IPv6 addresses for my server!

]]>