[arin-discuss] use of 128.66.0.0/16 not clear

[Christopher Morrow]

On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 3:40 AM,  <michael.dillon at bt.com> wrote:
>> If we manage to push off the exhaustion date by five or six
>> months, what have we accomplished?  Would that effort not
>> have been better spent on advancing the cause of IPv6, or
>> developing interoperability standards for carrier-grade NAT,
>> or whatever your vision for salvation in a post-IPv4-runout world is?
>
> I agree with Rob here. Heroic efforts to extend the IPv4 address
> lifetime are misplaced. If there is a desire to expend a heroic

I agree with this.

> effort on something, it should be directed at removing the barriers
> to full-blown IPv6 deployment. Any would-be heroes should sit down

<jumps in time machine>

> at the phone and start calling minor equipment vendors and software
> vendors to find out when they will support IPv6. Any bit of software
> used in network operational support or by home users needs to be
> IPv6 capable.

agreed, keeping in mind there all sorts of things out there that
aren't feature compatible v4/v6 (lookie a recently released product,
the Juniper EX platform...sad panda)

Customers of vendors really need to be clear (and follow through)
about what things they want in the products offered.

> Maybe ARIN could organize an IPv6 awareness sprint, and provide a room
> full of phones, with coffee and snacks for the volunteers?

It might be nice if someone (didn't one of the ipv6 taskforce people
do this) gather as many varied and sundry network devices + softwares
and matrix them against a set of 'capabilities' , publicize the matrix
and push vendors to answer why they aren't matching more of the
capabilities.

Just phone calls isn't gonna help (unless it's a majority of the
vendors customers of course).

-Chris