[arin-ppml] IPv6 Heretic thoughts

Cliff Bedore cliffb at cjbsys.bdb.com
Thu Sep 4 22:18:44 EDT 2008

Cort Buffington wrote:
> While I agree that CEOs are generally disinterested, I have  
> irrefutable scientific evidence to the contrary:
> I am a CEO. I run a non-profit corporation that operates a state-wide  
> R&E network consortium. Our backbone network has been in production  
> with IPv6 since February 2004. Today, all CPE routers are IPv6's with  
> only a couple of very small end-site exceptions. Several members have  
> asked us to turn it on to their LANs. This e-mail I'm typing will  
> travel to my mail server on an IPv6 socket. The browser that's open to  
> google on my desktop right now is open over an IPv6 socket.

OK, there's one CEO who can't wait. :-)

Not being funny, Can that IPv6 socket reach www.bdb.com?  If so, how? 

Also not trying to pick on you but non-profits tend to have different 
goals than for-profit entities.
> Many of you are probably asking whether I take my meds or not. I lived  
> through being a lowly technician on a network back in the days when  
> management refused to accept that we would really need to stop using  
> IPX and AppleTalk in favor of this IP stuff. After all, IPX was  
> everywhere. The Internet would most assuredly get IPX support before  
> we had to change over to IP to use it -- and if not, we could just run  
> through translators. Sure I was working in a shop that was probably  
> not the norm and had more strange notions than most, but nonetheless,  
> to me, much of this IPv6 discussion sounds very familiar.
> I've also worked in commercial two-way radio. I remember when  
> frequencies started to become scarce and the FCC started auctioning  
> off spectrum to the highest bidder. I talked to the guy (like 10  
> minutes ago) I worked for back then. I gave him the choice of running  
> out of spectrum and ending up in the auction environment we have  
> today, or taking 5 years to replace the majority of his infrastructure  
> so that he'd never be unable to get frequencies. Clearly, he'd have  
> opted to replace infrastructure. I could make mention of any number of  
> limited natural resources here, like oil, but I'm sure you all get my  
> point.
> So many times, when a resource grows scarce, there is no choice. This  
> time we have a choice. The majority seem to think that we'll just keep  
> extending IPv4 forever, somehow. Or that some replacement that won't  
> require work and a learning curve will come along, somehow. I grant  
> you that, the clear majority, may very well be right that IPv6 won't  
> be the answer. One day I may have to answer to my board of directors  
> about the resources I wasted on IPv6. I really do believe that if IPv6  
> is not the answer, it will be because we, as a society, refused to let  
> it be the answer. I will remain in the apparent minority that believes  
> it is the answer.
> If you've actually read this far, thank you for giving me a few  
> minutes of your time. I've lurked on this list for some time and said  
> very little. I appreciate the opinions and ideas -- even when I don't  
> agree with mine.

I read it and am impressed that you have gone as far as you have.  I 
think you will have to admit you are not a typical CEO in a typical 
for-profit company and are probably in the very small minority of 
entities who have gone gung ho for IPv6.  As you point out, lots of 
people bought Beta video players, HD DVD.  Hell I was a big proponent of 
CPM86/Concurrent CPM/86.  It was a much better system than MSDOS but 
that didn't make it a success.  And don't get me wrong.  I'm not 
particularly anti-IPv6 but it's just NOT happening in most of the 
world.  It doesn't seem like we're going to get a disruptive application 
for IPv6 so we need another hook to get people to buy in.  The only one 
I see is to get IPv6 and IPv4 talking transparently so we don't need 
dual stack and people can keep resources that use IPv4 and get to IPv6 
as progress and funds allow.  No one wants to go to IPv6 by itself 
because there is too much IPv4 they couldn't reach.  Dual stack is a 
kludge(IMO).  We need transparent communication between them and without 
that, I don't believe IPv6 will take off in my lifetime.


> Regards,
> Cort
> On Sep 4, 2008, at 12:40 PM, Cliff Bedore wrote:
>> There is no CEO in the world sitting around saying "Boy I can't wait  
>> to
>> get us on IPv6"....
> --
> Cort Buffington
> Executive Director
> The Kansas Research and Education Network
> cort at kanren.net
> Office: +1-785-856-9800 x301
> Mobile: +1-785-865-7206
> _______________________________________________
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list