[arin-ppml] Preemptive IPv6 assignment

On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 4:46 PM, William Herrin <bill at> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Heather Schiller
> <heather.skanks at> wrote:
>> Massively assigning
>> space doesn't come with a person to design your addressing plan,
>> updated software tools to support and configure, or turn v6 on your
>> routers.
>> In fact, I would argue against forced assignment - because monitoring
>> number of requests from the RIR may be a useful measure of potential
>> v6 adoption - if nothing else, it's an indication of the number of
>> organizations who have given it enough consideration to request a
> Hi Heather,
> Like a horse, you can't make me drink but you can lead me to water.
> You don't have to. I'll eventually seek water on my own. But how much
> money will your employer first lose to dual stack and v4 CGN?

guessing probably none? how would those be money losers? they'll be deploying:
  o v6 - dualstack
  o v6 - CGN/6rd/dslite

either way, 'win' (and v6 deployment). If the 'cgn' is merely v4
nat44... then things just keep chugging along, eh?

I must have missed the point...


> Lead us to water. Some of us will drink.
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
> --
> William D. Herrin ................ herrin at  bill at
> 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <>
> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
> _______________________________________________
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> Please contact info at if you experience any issues.