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

John M. Brown john at chagres.net
Thu Jan 9 16:33:43 EST 2003

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

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

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list