[ppml] Soliciting comments: IPv4 to IPv6 fast migration

[Stephen Sprunk]

Thus spake "Scott Leibrand" <sleibrand at internap.com>
> William Herrin wrote:
>> We can't go to the entrepreneurs and small operators out there
>> and in one moment say, "We know you're multihomed and have
>> a direct IPv4 addresses assignment today but you're just too
>> insignificant to play with the big boys in IPv6," then turn around
>> in the next moment and say, "But won't you pretty please make
>> your wonderful content available via IPv6 so that we big boys
>> don't get screwed by IPv4 depletion." It won't work. The small
>> operators will shake their heads at the irony of our predicament
>> and continue ignoring IPv6. More than a few will first flip us the
>> bird for our arrogance.
>
> Anyone who's multihomed and has a direct IPv4 assignment from
> ARIN (PI space) today already qualifies for a similar IPv6 PI
> assignment.  I'm not sure which existing policy you're referring to
> with your first statement, or who would need to say such a thing
> in the ARIN region.

That's the case for anyone who (a) got their PI block from ARIN, as opposed 
to legacy space, and (b) would still qualify for that block if they were to 
apply for it today.

However, I think the number of folks that have PIv4 space (legacy or not) 
but wouldn't qualify for a new minimum-sized block is fairly small.  And, 
for that matter, most of us wouldn't miss them if they refused to move to v6 
because of it, or our users wouldn't notice that they were passing through 
some sort of proxy or NAT-PT device to get to them (if we couldn't just 
ignore them).  I'm far more worried about getting Google, eBay, MySpace, 
CNN, etc. on v6 than I am the small folks, because the small folks are 
depending on the big boys to get vendors to make their products v6 capable.

S

Stephen Sprunk      "Those people who think they know everything
CCIE #3723         are a great annoyance to those of us who do."
K5SSS                                             --Isaac Asimov