[arin-discuss] Encouraging IPv6 Transition (From PPML)

Justin Oeder justin.oeder at beyondhosting.net
Mon May 14 20:33:11 EDT 2012 

Agreed!

Content/hosting providers will not make the change until they can guarantee all of their clients will still be able to access their content without issue.  ISPs will have to make the transition first using tunnels.  Then, and only then, will you see content/hosting providers move to IPv6 only.

Regards,
Justin Oeder
P. 513-299-7108 ext 11
C. 513-432-5152
E. Justin.Oeder at BeyondHosting.net

----- Original Message -----
From: john at quonix.net
To: arin-discuss at arin.net
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 8:17:08 PM
Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Encouraging IPv6 Transition (From PPML)

I've been following this thread today, many good points, and some of these 
points answer the fundamental issue... Why is v6 transition going so 
slowly? 

Its a chicken and egg scenario. The internet is a combination of people 
who use content (i.e. users behind an ISP), and people who host up content 
(i.e. servers in a datacenter). 

Right now there is very little global v6 use. People in datacenters aren't 
jumping into v6 because very few people are using content over v6. 
Likewise, even if the end user cared, very little content exists on v6 for 
end users to request anyway. 

One of these groups needs to "jump" so to speak. If the top 4 ISPs in the 
US moved over to v6 - content providers in datacenters would start to care 
about using v6. But thats not going to happen anytime soon. 

Here is my idea.... Get more end users requesting data over v6 through v4 
tunnels that are built into their operating system and browser - without 
them knowing it! This will cause a jump start. If the newer Mac and 
Windows OS's had built-in v4-to-v6 tunneling, and the browsers forced 
requests to AAAA records, then the worlds content providers would see 
larger and larger amounts of traffic coming in over v6 and this would 
cause people to start to change. 

Just my 2 cents....

-John Von Essen

----------------------------------------------------
>From : Jesse D. Geddis <jesse at la-broadband.com>
To : bpasdar at batblue.com <bpasdar at batblue.com>, John Brown 
<john at citylinkfiber.com> 
Subject : Re: [arin-discuss] Encouraging IPv6 Transition (From PPML)
Date : Mon, 14 May 2012 23:44:07 +0000
> Lets explore that question. First, my point of reference. I have over 
20,000 residential consumers (end users) directly connected on my network. 
I am a service provider and the owner. I also have an equal number of 
enterprise and service provider customers but they aren't in scope of this 
conversation. I rolled out IPv6 to all of my residential users and NAT 
their v4. I didn't get any complaints about things not working. Tellingly, 
I also didn't get a single user out of that 20,000 end users that even 
noticed they had a v6 address. AT&T as well as any other carrier can do 
this today. The technology to do this has existed for over a decade. 
> 
> I am Joe Blow next door to you. My internet works, all my needs are met, 
we'll say it's FiOS so it's "fast". What would compel me to ask verizon 
why they aren't supporting IPv6? Will my internet be faster? Will my 
internet be more reliable? Will I gain any functionality by utilizing v6? 
The answer to all these questions is invariably "no". Trumpeting v6 to end 
users is both inefficient and un-compelling. 
> 
> Again, using Westfield as an example. What would compel me to go to my 
carrier and demand v6 address space? It's more work for me, it provides no 
additional functionality in the next budgetary cycle. Why bother? 
> 
> ARIN has a tool (the only tool ARIN has in fact) of setting requirements 
before assigning additional address space. Please correct me if I'm wrong 
but my impression is that this tool is either not being wielded or it is 
not being wielded effectively. Otherwise I would be getting assigned a v6 
address by AT&T today. 
> 
> By directly targeting enterprise and end users we would be going about 
it backwards. I as a service provider chose to put all my residential 
users on v6 space. The size of perceived nimbleness of AT&T or Verizon is 
irrelevant. Remember the adage Necessity breeds ingenuity? If they can't 
get more address space unless they start making concrete efforts to roll 
out v6 to their end users they will not change their behaviour. 
> 
> --
> Jesse D. Geddis
> LA Broadband LLC
> 
> 
> From: Babak Pasdar <bpasdar at batblue.com<mailto:bpasdar at batblue.com>>
> Organization: Bat Blue Networks
> Reply-To: "bpasdar at batblue.com<mailto:bpasdar at batblue.com>" 
<bpasdar at batblue.com<mailto:bpasdar at batblue.com>> 
> Date: Monday, May 14, 2012 4:24 PM
> To: Jesse Geddis 
<jesse at la-broadband.com<mailto:jesse at la-broadband.com>>, John Brown 
<john at citylinkfiber.com<mailto:john at citylinkfiber.com>> 
> Cc: "arin-discuss at arin.net<mailto:arin-discuss at arin.net>" 
<arin-discuss at arin.net<mailto:arin-discuss at arin.net>> 
> Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Encouraging IPv6 Transition (From PPML)
> 
> Jesse,
> 
> Could it be that your view is based on your own experiences with 
carriers and customers and that may not reflect the industry on average.  
The people who don't don't understand the concept of data centers or how 
the Internet works are not the folks that I (and most likely the rest of 
the respondents in this thread) are targeting. 
> 
> Also, I do not see AT&T as an organization that is competitively agile 
to be a leader in this space.  Others have and most likely will continue 
to lead on this.  When they do, AT&T will follow. 
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Babak
> 
> --
> Babak Pasdar | President & CEO | Certified Ethical Hacker | Bat Blue 
Networks 
> (p) 212.461.3322 x3005 | (w) BatBlue.com<http://batblue.com/> | (t) 
@bpasdar<https://twitter.com/bpasdar> : 
@batblue<https://twitter.com/batblue> 
> 
> Learn About Cloud Security: Cloud Security 
Video<http://www.batblue.com/page.php?96> | Cloud Network 
Video<http://www.batblue.com/page.php?97> 
> 
> Bat Blue is The Official Provider for ESPN X 
Games<http://www.batblue.com/page.php?72> 
> ________________________________
> From: Jesse D. Geddis [mailto:jesse at la-broadband.com]
> To: John Brown [mailto:john at citylinkfiber.com]
> Cc: arin-discuss at arin.net<mailto:arin-discuss at arin.net> 
[mailto:arin-discuss at arin.net] 
> Sent: Mon, 14 May 2012 19:16:40 -0400
> Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Encouraging IPv6 Transition (From PPML)
> 
> I don't mean to be contrary here but these concepts are far too abstract 
for 99.9% of end users whom will have no point of reference. Most people I 
talk to didn't even know of the existence of data centres let alone have 
any clue what v4 vs v6 is. And why should they? There would be no direct 
benefit to the end user being on v6 over v4 or both. To them their 
"Internet" either works or it doesn't. Requiring implementation by the 
major carriers who are dragging their feet by saying no more IPs until 
they show they are on board is much more compelling. 
> 
> Jesse Geddis
> LA Broadband LLC
> ASN 16602
> 
> On May 14, 2012, at 3:31 PM, "John Brown" 
<john at citylinkfiber.com<mailto:john at citylinkfiber.com>> wrote: 
> 
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > IPv6 uptake is about end-users having a reason to care.
> > When they care, then the $ervice providers care.
> >
> > I suspect that when the 3.141 /8's are gone from ARIN, then people 
will 
> > really care and FAST.
> >
> > I still have service providers that tell me they don't have IPv6 
available 
> > today. National transit providers aren't fully supporting it yet.
> >
> > We have to find something(s) that will get the end user to give a darn 
and 
> > WANT IT.
> >
> > On 5/14/12 4:23 PM, "Chris Grundemann" 
<cgrundemann at gmail.com<mailto:cgrundemann at gmail.com>> wrote: 
> >
> >> On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Owen DeLong 
<owen at delong.com<mailto:owen at delong.com>> wrote: 
> >>> I would oppose this unless you're also willing to waive IPv6 
assignment 
> >>> fees that do not accompany an IPv4 resource application. I see no
> >>> benefit to the community from requiring people to consume extra IPv4
> >>> just to get a free IPv6 assignment. (Well, actually, I do see a 
small 
> >>> benefit in exhausting IPv4 and getting on with transition faster, 
but, I 
> >>> don't think it's necessarily good stewardship).
> >>
> >> You're right Owen, I was over-simplifying. My fear is that a total 
fee 
> >> waiver may hurt ARIN financially. Even free initial-assignments may
> >> cause harm.
> >>
> >> I don't have ARINs budget at my fingertips, perhaps a staffer can let
> >> us know how much it might cost to make initial IPv6 assignments (to
> >> end-users) free for a year and then half price for a year.
> >>
> >> That would do two things: First, it lowers a potential barrier, pure
> >> cost of assignment. Second, it puts a touch of urgency on initial 
IPv6 
> >> requests: "Hey boss, we have to at least get our assignment this year
> >> if we don't want to be forced to pay later..."
> >>
> >> ~Chris
> >>
> >>> Owen
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Sent from my iPad
> >>>
> >>> On May 14, 2012, at 3:03 PM, Scott Leibrand 
<scottleibrand at gmail.com<mailto:scottleibrand at gmail.com>> 
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> IMO 1A and 2A might usefully go together as a carrot + stick 
approach. 
> >>>> A little extra attestation work in exchange for a "get v6 free with
> >>>> your v4" offer should encourage v6 adoption without increasing the
> >>>> overall time+cost burden on the orgs applying for space.
> >>>>
> >>>> Scott
> >>>>
> >>>> On May 14, 2012, at 10:53 AM, Chris Grundemann 
<cgrundemann at gmail.com<mailto:cgrundemann at gmail.com>> 
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Four ideas to promote IPv6 deployment, for your consideration and
> >>>>> discussion:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1) Make it as easy as possible for an org who actually wants IPv6 
to 
> >>>>> get it. This is mostly in place today (allocation fee waivers, one
> >>>>> maint. fee per Org ID, ease of qualification, etc.) but there is 
still 
> >>>>> some possible room for improvement:
> >>>>> 1A) Waive IPv6 assignment fees for end-users who request both IPv4
> >>>>> and IPv6 simultaneously.
> >>>>> 1B) Move the </40 small/x-small threshold to <=/48.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2) Provide additional motivation for orgs to request and deploy 
IPv6. 
> >>>>> There are several top of mind methods to accomplish this:
> >>>>> 2A) Require the officer attestation to acknowledge the current
> >>>>> state of affairs regarding IPv4 exhaustion and IPv6 requirements.
> >>>>> 2B) Continue or even ramp up (especially targeting end users) 
ARINs 
> >>>>> outreach efforts (which have been substantial in previous years 
but 
> >>>>> are being wound down post IANA-exhaustion).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>> ~Chris
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> @ChrisGrundemann
> >>>>> http://chrisgrundemann.com
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> ARIN-Discuss
> >>>>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> >>>>> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List 
(ARIN-discuss at arin.net<mailto:ARIN-discuss at arin.net>). 
> >>>>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> >>>>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
> >>>>> Please contact info at arin.net<mailto:info at arin.net> if you 
experience any issues. 
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> ARIN-Discuss
> >>>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> >>>> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List 
(ARIN-discuss at arin.net<mailto:ARIN-discuss at arin.net>). 
> >>>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> >>>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
> >>>> Please contact info at arin.net<mailto:info at arin.net> if you 
experience any issues. 
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> @ChrisGrundemann
> >> http://chrisgrundemann.com
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> ARIN-Discuss
> >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> >> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List 
(ARIN-discuss at arin.net<mailto:ARIN-discuss at arin.net>). 
> >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> >> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
> >> Please contact info at arin.net<mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience 
any issues. 
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ARIN-Discuss
> > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> > the ARIN Discussion Mailing List 
(ARIN-discuss at arin.net<mailto:ARIN-discuss at arin.net>). 
> > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
> > Please contact info at arin.net<mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience 
any issues. 
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Discuss
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List 
(ARIN-discuss at arin.net<mailto:ARIN-discuss at arin.net>). 
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
> Please contact info at arin.net<mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience any 
issues. 
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Discuss
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

_______________________________________________
ARIN-Discuss
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

More information about the ARIN-discuss mailing list