[ppml] Policy Proposal: 2007-12 IPv4 Countdown Policy Proposal

[Ted Mittelstaedt]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net]On Behalf Of
>Antonio Querubin
>Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 11:05 AM
>To: ppml at arin.net
>Subject: Re: [ppml] Policy Proposal: 2007-12 IPv4 Countdown Policy
>Proposal
>
>
>I've been following this discussion for a while

yes, yes,

>and at first I thought the
>proposal might have some merit in trying to prevent the feared
>'train-wreck'.  However, as written it seems to me that all it really does
>is cause the RIRs and it's members to expend a quite a bit of time and
>energy to take non-trivial measures to extend the life of a protocol that
>already has a suitable substitute.  That time and energy would be better
>spent on IPv6 transition efforts.  I don't see this as an impending
>train-wreck but rather an old car about to run out of gas while there is a
>newer, more capable car with a more abundant fuel source ready to take
>it's place.  We don't need to take extraordinary measures to banish the
>old car from the highway.  Just park it, get in the new car and move on.
>

Antonio, you are answering your own question.

The proposal was accepted for discussion precisely because of people
like you who are merely 'following" the discussion and NOT contributing
your opinions.

If everyone wants to go full speed on an IPv6 transition plan then great.

If everyone wants to spend time and energy extending the life of a protocol
that has a suitable substitute, then great.

The problem is that since too many people are merely following and not
venturing opinions, we don't know what people want.  Richard Nixon coined
a term for these people, calling them the "Silent Majority"

If the "Silent Majority" prefers IPv6 transition then the only way we
may be able to get it to happen is by going in the opposite direction -
towards extending IPv4 - which will get the "Silent Majority" to realize
that unless they say something, then they won't get what they want.

In the United States, the "Silent Majority" was seen in operation in the
November 2006 congressional midterm elections.  Up until then, the
pro-war hawks were telling the United States that the majority of people
wanted to stay in Iraq and keep fighting.  The "Silent Majority" voted
in the opposite direction, and emasculated the party in power and the
President.  (and about time, too)  In other words, it wasn't until they
were forced to speak, that they did. (by voting)  It may be that much
the same thing is happening here.

It may be that only serious efforts to extend IPv4 will crystalize people's
determination to switchover to IPv6.  It certainly seemed to do so for you.

Think about it.

Ted