[arin-discuss] urgency of IPv6

[Lee Howard]

----- Original Message 
----
> From: Leo Bicknell <bicknell at ufp.org>
> Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] fee waivers
>

> Lastly, it seems to me a lot of 
> folks want to force IPv6 adoption
> in a faster time frame, for reasons I do 
> not understand.  There's
> an urgency to cajole others into doing IPv6 
> sooner, but I have no
> idea for what end.  People will do it when they 
> need it, stop trying
> to manipulate them into doing it sooner, no one likes 
> that.
>
> IPv6 will happen, on it's own schedule.  Take a deep 
> breath.

Once an organization is unable to receive allocations of
IPv4 from ARIN, it will have to either stop the business
requiring new addresses, use IPv6, or lean on an 
address market, NAT444, dual-stack lite, or AFT 
(possibly in combination with IPv6).  A market is likely 
to be messy, and in several scenarios leads to filtering, 
such that there are hosts unable to reach other hosts on 
the Internet.  The other mechanisms break some 
applications.

Until all hosts use IPv6, IPv6 also has an unreachability 
problem.  Therefore, the organization with unmet IPv4
need is likely to have connectivity problems, until 
everyone else supports IPv6.  This causes some people
concern, and is why some people are encouraging others 
to start now.

This is not a Board position, just a Lee Howard position.

Lee