[ppml] those pesky users...
Daniel Corbe
dcorbe at gmail.com
Mon Mar 26 14:06:25 EDT 2007
- Previous message: [ppml] those pesky users...
- Next message: [ppml] those pesky users...
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
An IPv6 allocation (even an end user allocation) is already vastly larger than the typical IPv4 allocation On Mar 26, 2007, at 1:55 PM, Johnson, Ron wrote: > >>> Quoting Sean Reifschneider <jafo at tummy.com>: > > >>> I've contacted my upstreams, and one is expecting to add IPv6 within > the >>> next year. The other one is checking with their network engineers, > and has >>> been for days and days, so I'm not optimistic that they're right on > top of >>> it. ;-) > > >> Yea. I contacted one of my upstreams 2 years ago about routing IPv6 >> and they said they'd get back to me in a few days. I guess a "few" >> days is about 700. > >> Aaron > > > Ok, I am going to put on my smarty pants... > Since the release of RFC-1918 and CIDR, the pressure on address space > has decreased significantly. > For the most part we are able to live within our means. > We make our downstreams justify address requests, we press for 1918 > use > with NAT when ever possible, > and we recycle disconnected customer blocks regularly. > > As a mid-sized ISP, we just don't feel the drive to change our entire > address scheme for no good > reason. My management certainly does not want large scale > disruptions in > service to perform what is > seen as unnecessary renumbering. > > If ARIN were in fact offering an exchange program where we would > receive > vastly increased sized IPv6 allocations > for a greatly reduced fee over the IPv4 blocks. A case could be > made on > the economics of changing > to v6. Otherwise, the folks that actually run our businesses that we > work in, (Well some of us anyways) have no > justification to act upon this whole new fangled IP address scheme. > Remember, that people making the business > decisions for the most part do not understand the technical, so > technical arguments for network modifications > requires an economic reason. > > Right now, the conversion with management over IPv6 goes like this: > ENG: Hey, err, we are considering renumbering the backbone to support > IPv6. > MGT: Why? > ENG: Because IPv4 is going to run out, and we need to be ready for the > future. > MGT: When exactly is this drop dead date of address space running out? > ENG: Well, sometime soon, perhaps in the next 5 years. > MGT: What does this entail? > ENG: Renumbering all the backbone IP addresses, training all the > operations and support staff to understand the new IP scheme. A number > of change windows, a allocation fee from ARIN, a audit to ensure all > devices support the new Scheme... Etc... > MGT: Come back in four years. > > > Ron Johnson > New Edge Networks. > > > _______________________________________________ > This message sent to you through the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List > (PPML at arin.net). > Manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml
- Previous message: [ppml] those pesky users...
- Next message: [ppml] those pesky users...
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list