said by aefstoggaflm: said by mikev:
Should this surprise me? Because it doesn't.
Please explain why you feel that way.
Partly because it's Verizon.
But also partly because an implementation of IPv6 for millions of users across geographically diverse areas is no simple feat. First, they need to make sure that all of THEIR hardware is compatible. Routers, gateways, TV equipment, MDU equipment, etc. Anything that they monitor over their network to ensure everything is working properly also falls into that category. Anything that isn't needs to be upgraded, requiring procurement, configuration, and installation of new hardware, which of course needs to happen at times that impact we the end users the least (overnight).
Then they move onto end-user equipment. Millions of MDU's, ONT's, STB's, routers... firmware updates may need to be done for things that are capable of supporting IPv6... software development, testing, rollout... It takes time to do all of this properly. End-user items that aren't capable need to be replaced/upgraded. It's possible that replacement of end-user equipment could be delayed until after implementing IPv6 on the network, since IPv4 would still be running at the same time. But this also costs money, so they need to be ready to spend the money needed for new customer hardware to be installed.
And then there's the actual "flipping the switch". New configurations for the equipment that make IPv6 happen need to be tested and implemented. Technicians need to be on-hand and ready to resolve any issues that arise in order to ensure minimal downtime. Support staff need to also be able to handle calls/chat sessions if end-users do have problems. Oh, and they'll also probably need to go through training on this too.
Everything here costs money. New hardware... software development and rollout... configuration testing and implemtation... training of employees... extra hours/employees to maintain service levels. Verizon's focus on FiOS has been more on signing up new customers and getting existing customers to upgrade to more expensive services, in order to keep up the bottom line. So it wouldn't surprise me if they slowed down the IPv6 plans in order to save some money. But they wouldn't tell us about this, of course.
So with everything that needs to be done for this kind of implementation, it doesn't surprise me at all that they missed the date that they set.
It DOES surprise me that it still isn't implemented though, now almost 5 months after Q3 2012 ended.