[ppml] Proposed Policy: IPv4 Countdown

[JORDI PALET MARTINEZ]

Hi Martin,

No, I'm not in favor of this policy. I think it is unfair if I look at it
from different regions perspective.

Even if I'm clearly strongly in favor of IPv6 adoption, and I will like to
see it happening as fast as possible, I think artificial measures aren't
good. I know this may be not the main motivation for this proposal, but may
be perceived as such.

I'm also very concerned about anti-trust implications (I've said this
already about other policies, but this belongs to another thread :-)). We
are not lawyers, but I feel that when we make policies, we need to look into
that part if we don't want to endanger the policy process. With this policy
proposal we are calling governments and regulators to come into the RIRs
business, which I think is a very bad idea.

Regards,
Jordi




> De: Martin Hannigan <martin.hannigan at batelnet.bs>
> Responder a: <martin.hannigan at batelnet.bs>
> Fecha: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 20:02:17 -0400
> Para: <jordi.palet at consulintel.es>, <ppml at arin.net>
> Asunto: Re: [ppml] Proposed Policy: IPv4 Countdown
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet at consulintel.es>
> To: <ppml at arin.net>
> Subject: Re: [ppml] Proposed Policy: IPv4 Countdown
> Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:50:50 +0100
> 
>> That's the magic of transition mechanisms such as Teredo.
>> 
>> Even if the NAT/CPEs are not IPv6 capable, more and more
>> users will start using Vista and other OSs and
>> applications that will prefer IPv6, especially peer to
>> peer. It simply works. More and more IPv6 traffic is
>> there.
>> 
>> 99% of the time, IPv6 traffic measurements only count
>> native IPv6. That's wrong and many people is not realizing
>> that they are transporting IPv6 already, much more than
>> what they could believe.
>> 
>> Why IPv6 core is relevant then ? Because if you upgrade
>> your access and core networks, even if you don't provide
>> native IPv6 up to the CPE, but you provide some local
>> transition mechanisms, then transition is used only from
>> the host behind the CPE to your network, instead of being
>> used to third party networks, which could even mean that
>> you can even save some transit cost if peering with other
>> ISPs with IPv6, etc.
>> 
>> I've prepared a presentation about this ("The cost of NOT
>> deploying IPv6") and I'm working in a paper with concrete
>> measurements.
> 
> 
> Jordi, do you support the policy that started this thread?
> 
> 
> 




**********************************************
The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org

Bye 6Bone. Hi, IPv6 !
http://www.ipv6day.org

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.