[ppml] Proposed Policy: IPv4 Countdown

Martin Hannigan martin.hannigan at batelnet.bs
Thu Mar 15 20:02:17 EDT 2007

----- 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?

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list