Telcos had an advantage, they were able to put the cost of that new fancy switch into our cost study / rate base.
You mean like pulse dialing and stepper relays vs touch tone dialing?
I'm sure there were people that felt the same about that too.
That mindset is simply you already paid for the old stuff, it's working fine, you would rather not understand or think about the problems the new tech solves or benefits it provides.
To be motivated to do something you have to have a reason or goal.
Most all goal seeking behavior in business can be put two buckets: 1) revenue at risk and 2) revenue enabled.
i.e. one is going away from pain and the other is going towards a reward.
Making a plan is based on your perception of current and future events.
At scale the market does a whole lot of testing of economic fitness functions that are the result of the decisions of each of our companies makes about what all of this means.
If you were an independent telephone company around 1955 to 1965 with relay based switches deciding when and if and why to use DTMF or a variant, I'm sure there was exactly the same dynamic. Situation: telecom company with old technology that was still working trying to decide what to do.
I mean, your phones still worked on that day you were starting out the window musing about it. Why not just go to lunch and forget about it?
While you were out to lunch after putting off deciding what to do about your relay switches around the same period of time the global phone system was growing at a breakneck speed and the first submarine transatlantic telephone cable system was getting run.
Some people won't like this story because it is about making business decisions about technology when you aren't sure of the reasons to either do or not do something and isn't arguing about some specific concrete reason to add IPv6 support like: 1) the world has more people than IPv4 addresses or something 2) you work for a big company and would like your revenue from the Internet to keep growing over the next 10 years uninterrupted due the risk of not supporting IPv6 and this is too trivial of a technology decision because the incremental cost is so small (compared to all the other fires you have burning) to just add support anyway. I get where you are coming from.
On 3/31/19 4:19 PM, Matt Hoppes wrote:
Going to play devils advocate.
If frontier has a ton of ipv4 addresses, what benefit is there to them in rolling out ipv6?
What benefit is there to you?
Still it's pretty darn good having real broadband on the farm. One thing at a time.
But, let's start thinking about ways to get Frontier up to speed on the IPv6 thing.
On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 4:24 PM Aaron C. de Bruyn <aaron@heyaaron.com> wrote:
You're not alone.
I talked with my local provider about 4 years ago and they said "We will probably start looking into IPv6 next year".I talked with them last month and they said "Yeah, everyone seems to be offering it. I guess I'll have to start reading how to implement it".
I'm sure 2045 will finally be the year of IPv6 everywhere.
-A
On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 7:36 AM C. A. Fillekes <cfillekes@gmail.com> wrote:
So by COB yesterday we now officially have FIOS at our farm.
Went from 3Mbps to around 30 measured average. Yay.
It's a business account, Frontier. But...still no IPv6.
The new router's capable of it. What's the hold up?
Customer service's response is "We don't offer that".