[ppml] Policy Proposal: Expand timeframe of Additional Requests

Cliff Bedore cliffb at cjbsys.bdb.com
Thu Aug 16 13:24:27 EDT 2007

> David Conrad wrote:
> >
> >> 3) History.  The history of technology change has been that as soon  
> >> as something new is introduced, people start getting afraid of  
> >> being left behind and they will jump on the new thing, even if the  
> >> old thing works as well or even better.
> >>     
> >
> > This does not appear to have impacted the uptake of IPv6.
> >
> >
> >   
> And this is where the earlier VHS vs BETAMAX analogy fails.
> When two competing technologies are head to head at the same time, and
> both offer (roughly) the same solution, your get these classic battles;
> VHS vs BETAMAX, Blu-RAY vs HD_DVD and of course, IP vs (IPX, banyan,
> X.25, SNA, the list goes on).
> There was a clear winner (eventually) in all those.
> However, comparing IPv6 to IPv4 isn't the same as VHS vs BETAMAX.
> Imagine if only BETAMAX was available in the early 80's (late 70's?) and
> VHS came along 10 years later. It offers no compelling reason to upgrade
> since it only offers essentially the same feature set. It'd never even
> get off the ground. For the consumer, a completely new technology with a
> compelling advantage needed to come along before VHS was abandoned (DVD
> was that).

I think a better analogy would be CDROMS.  Everybody could read and eventually
write to them.  When DVDs came along (at least in the computer sense), they
could read and write CDROMs.  As I understand it, HD_DVD and BLU-RAY will also
be backward compatible.  That made adopting the new technology a no-brainer.
I could read and write CDs with my DVD as well as create DVDs.  IPv6 offers no
such backward compatibility (Ok dual-stack does but it ain't quite the same).
This will make it much harder to convince people that they want to change.
The only technology thing I can think of that is as disruptive is the HDTV
debacle foisted on the US by the FCC.  Again a very disruptive technology
change. (which I'll adopt around Feb 2009 :-) )

> I see IPv6 in the same boat, trying to compete with IPv4 10 years (okay,
> probably like 25 years) later with essentially the same feature set.
> That's a hard sell.
> And folks. Please don't forget. The only migration strategy towards IPv6
> is dual-stack. Folks are going to need both v6 and v4 addresses for a
> long time, this isn't going to relieve pressure for v4 addresses.
> -lee
> _______________________________________________
> 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.

Cliff Bedore
7403 Radcliffe Dr. College Park MD 20740
cliffb at cjbsys.bdb.com http://www.bdb.com
Amateur Radio Call Sign W3CB For info on ham radio, http://www.arrl.org/

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list