[ppml] NANOG IPv4 Exhaustion BoF
michael.dillon at bt.com
michael.dillon at bt.com
Fri Mar 7 06:06:41 EST 2008
- Previous message: [ppml] NANOG IPv4 Exhaustion BoF
- Next message: [ppml] NANOG IPv4 Exhaustion BoF
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> Tom, as Scott has already requested from you, we haven't seen > any other options from you yet! Once the unallocated space is > exhausted then if you still want IPv4 addresses you are going > to have get addresses from someone who already has them. Not so. You can also NOT GET ANY new IP addresses, and suffer the consequences. That could mean bankruptcy or it could mean increased costs to transfer to IPv6 in a hurry. The increased costs would mainly be lost opportunities while you fix the problem, and increased churn rates as some customers treat your company like a leper. The fact is that nobody needs to be dependent on new IPv4 addresses after the runout date. There is plenty of time for companies to make their businesses work with a mix of IPv6 and IPv4. There have been some very public demonstrations of this mixture at the last ARIN and NANOG meetings. There will be another demo at the upcoming IETF meeting. So far, if you examine the results of these demonstrations, there are no serious problems that could not be fixed within a two year timeframe. And we do have two years, probably more, to fix these issues. Once it is demonstrably possible to run a fully mixed IPv4 and IPv6 network, the need for transfers disappears. Note that I am not referring here to dual-stack networks. When I say MIXED I mean that you have some endpoints that are IPv4 and some endpoints that are IPV6 and that they can both communicate with each other over infrastructure that has at least one pure IPv6 section in it. > Yes, the situation the this industry > has driven itself into is messy, but I'm pretty sure that > global collapse is not exactly on the agenda. Indeed. The situation is more like the telecom collapse era when companies that were not sufficiently robust went out of business or were bought out or shrunk. This is a good thing for the economy since it is part of the process of natural selection of business models. > What I would claim is that this transition is just another > risk factor in an industry that has its fair share already > and doubtless will continue to have its fair share in the future. Exactly. There is no need for RIRs to take any special actions to prepare for IPv4 runout. No transfer policy is needed. Just keep running the RIR as normal and keep reporting status so that we can see how much time is left. --Michael Dillon Don't forget that ARIN has a wiki with info (and pointers to resources) for network providers who want to add IPv6 to their networks. http://www.getipv6.info
- Previous message: [ppml] NANOG IPv4 Exhaustion BoF
- Next message: [ppml] NANOG IPv4 Exhaustion BoF
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list