[ppml] Re: Deployment triggers, dates and definitions WAS: backbones

[John M. Brown]

YES.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net] On 
> Behalf Of Sweeting, John
> Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 2:54 PM
> To: 'john at chagres.net'; 'Alec H. Peterson'; 'Mury'
> Cc: ppml at arin.net
> Subject: RE: [ppml] Re: Deployment triggers, dates and 
> definitions WAS: backbones
> 
> 
> John,
> 
> Do you think it would be possible to work with your group to 
> come up with an allocation/assignment policy that would 
> benefit the Internet community as a whole and your group 
> specifically? It is always easier to start a discussion based 
> on a proposal, plus if it is an official proposal then it 
> MUST go through the process and be considered. Thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John M. Brown [mailto:john at chagres.net]
> Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 4:34 PM
> To: 'Alec H. Peterson'; 'Mury'
> Cc: ppml at arin.net
> Subject: RE: [ppml] Re: Deployment triggers, dates and 
> definitions WAS: backbones
> 
> 
> I disagree that there is no demand.
> 
> I represent a group of small providers that WOULD LIKE
> to start using v6 but feel the current policy prevents
> them from making the request unless the BS the request.
> 
> Plus, several corporate clients that would like to get
> started.
> 
> Its not off topic to figure out what is needed to be done
> from a "Crisp and Clear IP Allocation" policy within ARIN
> to help jump start the process.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net] On
> > Behalf Of Alec H. Peterson
> > Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 2:28 PM
> > To: Mury
> > Cc: ppml at arin.net
> > Subject: [ppml] Re: Deployment triggers, dates and 
> > definitions WAS: backbones
> > 
> > 
> > --On Thursday, January 9, 2003 15:29 -0600 Mury
> > <mury at goldengate.net> wrote:
> > 
> > >
> > > Out of curiousity however, how do you or other experts see the
> > > transition to IPv6 happening?  Is there some other strategy 
> > other than
> > > hoping a handful of early adopters will develop an 
> application that
> > > requires IPv6 to work and that everyone will want to get 
> > their hands
> > > on it?
> > 
> > There are still too many unasnswered questions, and you
> > raised a lot of 
> > them.  We still haven't figured out how to solve the IPv4 
> multihoming 
> > problems in IPv6.  But the biggest issue is money.  
> > Especially in the days 
> > of the internet/telco bust no backbones are going to throw a 
> > ton of money 
> > at an issue that they won't see a benefit from in the short 
> > term.  There is 
> > no consumer demand (or even corporate demand).
> > 
> > But we are getting _WAY_ off topic here, again.
> > 
> > Alec
> > 
> > --
> > Alec H. Peterson -- ahp at hilander.com
> > Chief Technology Officer
> > Catbird Networks, http://www.catbird.com
> > 
>