[arin-discuss] ipv6 technology supplier phone bank?

Lee Howard spiffnolee at yahoo.com
Tue Sep 29 08:14:10 EDT 2009

I'm not sure this is still an arin-discuss thread.  I'm happy to move it
somewhere else, unless we quickly get back to an ARIN-member
question, like, "How should ARIN spend its resources to help?"

> > ISPs will break IPv4 for their paying customers, and charge to put it
> > back
> > together?    Brilliant!
> > Especially if the guy down the street hasn't broken it yet.[1]
> It is not my plan, it is what the ISPs have backed themselves into by
> stalling their IPv6 deployments.

IPv6 in the core is easy(ish).
IPv6 in the data center is easy(ish).
IPv6 at the edge is hard.  It's partly a network value problem: consumers
won't pay more for gateways and gadgets that support IPv6, so vendors
don't make them.  

> > If IPv6 requires a new home gateway but IPv4 only requires part of a
> > CGN,
> > which is cheaper?  Who incurs the cost? [2]
> If you look at the CGN deployment plans, they all require a new home gateway
> anyway. 


> CGN will break just about everything but simple html and pop, and can't
> begin to scale in the face of the AJAX fad. It really doesn't matter which
> one you pick, you are just trading off which apps break, and how much the
> new home router is going to cost.

Really?  I'm looking for a list of application protocols somewhere.  Do you
have one handy?

> > [1]  Notice whether IPv4 is broken for existing customers or only new
> > customers.  
> This is a very short term viewpoint.

Uh, yeah.  Remember the problem under discussion was that CIOs are
too short-sighted to deploy IPv6 this early, because they're focused on
quarterly earnings?

> It doesn't take a Nobel prize winner to
> figure out that the existing customers will be screwed over just like the
> new ones in short order  'just because you can'. There will be lots of
> make-work shuffling the old customers into the new model and back when they
> complain, just to figure out which ones are using apps that care. 

You have a very low regard for ISPs.  My mileage is different.

> > What happens to competition if users can't switch providers
> > and receive a comparable IPv4 service?
> This question makes it sound like somebody cares about competition.... ;)
> There is not going to be a 'comparable IPv4 service', no matter how you want
> to define that, once the free pool is gone. 

Working from your previous paragraph, there could well be two classes
of Internet subscribers: screwed and unscrewed.  Could be based on who
got there first, or could be based on who pays what.  

If it lasts for any length of time, we may see broad adoption of RFC3093
(Firewall Enhancement Protocol, i.e., everything over HTTP).

> > [2]  Important question.  Also important is, "Who are they paying, and
> > what
> > does their ROI look like?"  Are CPE vendors thinking, "If I don't
> > support
> > IPv6 until 2012, then all my consumers will have to buy new gear from
> > me
> > again when they're forced into IPv6"?
> I have no idea what CPE vendors are thinking (including the Linksys team
> which I try to motivate), but I really doubt they will hear IPv6 from
> consumers, while the ISPs have not been telling the CPE vendors that they
> need IPv6 capable cpe until very recently, and most ISPs haven't done that
> yet. CPE vendors run on very thin margins, so they are not even going to
> start thinking about IPv6 until they get very clear indications from the
> ISPs as to what is needed. So far the few messages I am aware of are; not
> coherent; nothing more than an acronym; have not clear timeframes or orders
> ... YMMV

My point was more that CPE vendors don't sell to ISPs, they sell to 
consumers, who really don't want to be bothered.  ISPs can tell what is
needed (work in progress) but don't generally send POs.

How should ARIN spend its resources to help?



More information about the ARIN-discuss mailing list