[arin-discuss] neophyte IPv6 inital allocation and fee question
> Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 08:32:55 +0100
> From: <michael.dillon at bt.com>
> > As a small ISP who really can't afford such an increase should we just
> > stop worrying about IPv6 at this time? (honest question, I have plenty
> > of other issues with which to be concerned.)
> Yes. Not everyone has to get ready for IPv6 right now. In particular if
> you are dependent on upstream providers who have not yet made IPv6
> service available to you, then there is nothing wrong with putting it
> Ideally you wouldn't totally ignore it but get your technical people to
> do some experimenting with ULA addresses or a tunnel to he.net when they
> have some spare moments.
i think a tunnel, to he.net or elsewhere, is an necessary immediate step
even if it means renumbering when your physical upstreams gain ipv6
i also think experimenting, either with ULA or tunnels, is a necessary
immediate step for all providers, to be sure you've at least identified
all your non-ipv6-capable servers, routers, and business processes.
> It is the national providers and large regional providers who have the
> biggest risk in not being ready with IPv6 when IPv4 runout occurs.
while that risk does increase dramatically with footprint and capital plant,
*noone* in this business can afford the risk of completely ignoring ipv6.
i'm reminded of the math for getting as many survivors as possible from a
burning building. the most important ingredients are avoiding panic, and
beginning the evacuation as early as possible, ideally before there's even
an obvious need for urgency.
i strongly recommend that all of us get ipv6 working before there's urgency.