[ppml] alternative realities
kkargel at polartel.com
Wed Aug 8 10:25:36 EDT 2007
I suspect - as you say - you may be being the pessimist here.
You are not taking in to account v4<->v6 gateway services, that will
continue to offer connectivity to both nets so long as the dual stack
exists. Don't get me wrong, pessimists have value too, we need to look
at all sides of the situation.
Maybe I am in a soft place. I have my IPv4, and if necessary I
can squeeze what I have to provide for me during growth. I can nat, and
use private space if needed. It will restrict what my customers can do
but that is better than cutting them off. It may not be easy or
comfortable, but it can be done. I also have my IPv6 allocation, and
with the help of the wonderful folks at Hurricane Electric I am learning
to use it. That is the best advice I can give to anyone. Get your IPv6
now, get it in place and running. If you learn to dual stack and set up
a 4<->6 gateway that will take some small pressure off of your IPv4
infrastructure. You will be able to continue providing IPv4 to your
customers, you will be able to transparantly provide what services are
available on IPv6.
I am sure we will see customers demanding both IPv4 and IPv6
(even if they don't know that's what they are doing). Because of that I
think it is foolish to slit our own throats by forcing the demise of a
service our customers demand. So long as they keep giving me money I
will do my danged best to provide what they are paying me for.
The "if I can't have it nobody can" school of thought might make
you feel better momentarily, but it won't work in the long run.
Accelerating the demise of IPv4 unnaturally is a great example of
'cutting off your nose to spite your face', if you pardon the
It is sort of like looking at a gas4 shortage. It is obvious
that if there is a gas4 shortage and you sell your car that you won't
have a gas4 problem anymore. Unfortunaltely you won't be able to meet
your transportation needs either.
Naturally you will try to proselytize and get everyone else to
sell their cars too, but that won't do anything about the need for
personal transportation. Getting the government to outlaw cars
altogether won't help the short term needs either.
Of course you can advocate the formation of the electric bus6
service, that someday will stop at everyone's house and take them where
they need to go, but in the meantime your neighbors and family won't be
able to buy more groceries than they can carry, and they will only be
able to shop at the local store. On the other hand, if you kept your
car, and offered rides to your neighbors whenever you could, while at
the same time working towards getting electric bus6 running, maybe you
could continue to meet your needs until bus6 was fully functional and
could take care of you.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Beland [mailto:mark at mcsnet.ca]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 5:43 PM
> To: Kevin Kargel
> Cc: ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [ppml] alternative realities
> First off, I think I'm one of the 'smaller guys'.. (two
> /20's).. I don't know if my concerns here are well founded,
> but the way I can see this going over, the big guys won't be
> caught out in the cold, they'll strategically buy out a few
> legacy ipv4 holders making sure they have got all the
> addresses they need......... If the big guys have ample
> supply of ipv4 addresses, why switch... This forces your
> competitors (the little guys) to put customers on ipv6..
> My concern here, bottom line, is some ISP's being forced to
> put users on
> ipv6 while others are not... I think there will be a great
> deal of resistance from users..... especially when they
> realize that they have a small fraction of the services
> available on ipv6 (consider peer-to-peer applications) .......
> Obviously, over time, this will change,
> but this will put some providers (I think all the little
> ones) at a significant disadvantage once they run out of ipv4 space.
> I think we'll see users demanding both ipv4 and ipv6 (at
> first)...... In an ideal situation, like you say, the
> transition occurs naturally.... But I think what will happen
> is that ISP's won't offer ipv6 until Arin nearly runs out of
> ipv4 addresses. Then we won't have ipv4 addresses to give
> them, and ipv4 will be the new selling feature, customers
> will shop for isp's who can offer them ipv4............. I
> don't think this situation is in anyone's best interest.
> But the big guys will probably be in a better position
> because they'll be able to find addresses..?.. ... ... I just
> wish we could take a harder line focused on discontinuing v4
> rather than just letting it die out, as this would avoid the
> supply and demand situation that I see happening... ... Am
> I'm just being a pessimist here?
> Kevin Kargel wrote:
> > I have a hard time accepting any philosophy that says
> "just make it
> > more expensive because your can"..
> > If you have a whole bunch of money that you don't know what
> to do with
> > I can give you some good ideas.. but I need every penny I have, so
> > please quit spending it for me.
> > What you will do by artificially jacking v4 prices is rape
> the small
> > shops and drive them out of business. Maybe that is your
> intent, to
> > leave consumers with nobody to deal with but the mega-ISP's..
> > personally I think that is a pretty sad way to think about it.
> > There is nothing evil about leaving IPv4 in place. If you
> don't want
> > to use it then don't use it. People will migrate to v6 as content
> > does, and as hardware evolves to handle it. This will be a natural
> > and unavoidable transition.
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net]
> On Behalf
> >> Of Mark Beland
> >> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 3:05 PM
> >> To: David Conrad
> >> Cc: ppml at arin.net
> >> Subject: Re: [ppml] alternative realities
> >> I completely agree,
> >> The hard core capitalists would say let market forces drive the
> >> deployment of ipv6. That is to say, I think ARIN is in a
> position to
> >> force the implementation of ipv6, and thats what they
> should do, work
> >> towards making ipv4 more expensive, less practical, or simply
> >> 'expire'
> >> allocations to force rapid uptake of ipv6 so we're not
> living out the
> >> next 20 years in an mixed v4 v6 environment.
> >> Unless proper planning is done to ensure a smooth
> migration, what we
> >> will see is users demanding either or both ipv4 and
> >> ipv6 addresses creating a really big mess..... Not to mention the
> >> supposed 'free market' of ipv4 addresses that are liable
> to be traded
> >> as commodities once exhaustion occurs.
> >> From where I stand, the question here is whether we
> choose to plan
> >> ahead and take measures to ensure the development of a proper
> >> migration strategy that encourages/forces the upgrade to the new
> >> technology, or simply let the network operators find their own
> >> solutions that may or may not be in the best interest of the
> >> community at large.
> >> David Conrad wrote:
> >>> Ted,
> >>> On Aug 7, 2007, at 12:29 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> >>>> When we see Windows Vista reaching 50% penetration and the "post
> >>>> Vista" windows OS at 20% penetration, and the "pre Vista"
> >> os's at 30%
> >>>> penetration of all Windows desktops, that will then be
> the time to
> >>>> start discussing migration of SOHO end users independently
> >> connected
> >>>> to ISPs, to IPv6.
> >>> An interesting theory. But doesn't this assume that the
> >> content those
> >>> users want to gain access to is also available on IPv6?
> >> And why would
> >>> those content providers assume the cost of deploying IPv6
> >> if there are
> >>> no customers to use it?
> >>> Regards,
> >>> -drc
> >>> (who has given up and turned off IPv6 in my laptop because
> >> it was too
> >>> annoying to wait for IPv6 to fail before falling back to IPv4)
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> PPML
> >>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed
> >> to the ARIN
> >>> Public Policy Mailing List (PPML at arin.net).
> >>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> >>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml Please
> contact the ARIN
> >>> Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you
> >> experience any issues.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> PPML
> >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed
> to the ARIN
> >> Public Policy Mailing List (PPML at arin.net).
> >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> >> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml Please contact
> the ARIN
> >> Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any
> >> issues.
> > _______________________________________________
> > PPML
> > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed
> to the ARIN
> > Public Policy Mailing List (PPML at arin.net).
> > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml Please contact the ARIN
> > Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you
> experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-PPML