[arin-ppml] IPv6 Heretic thoughts
Cort Buffington
cort at kanren.net
Thu Sep 4 23:07:23 EDT 2008
Cliff,
You are correct, I am not the typical CEO and you are correct again
about non-profit. In fact, you really just gave me a nice opening to
jump through :) And yes, I would agree with many of your comments,
which I would boil down to something (please forgive a little artistic
license here) like "we need an easy button to push"... Or at least
that's how I'd like to interpret some of your original comments,
because I fear that's what It'll take.
But you all have to look out for the small segment of us IPv6 people.
Our numbers are growing. The national R&E community is taking this
very seriously. Yes, I am on Internet2's IPv6 Working Group, which
makes me a zealot I suppose... But, I'm also seeing an unprecedented
growth in both interest and adoption. And even folks with huge
enterprises out there, like Brother Farmer, have been working towards
it for years already.
So, when a majority of major universities in the US have taken the
plunge, and the state, regional R&Es are all doing it (many already
are), and Internet2 is doing it (has for years), and these people are
connected to major content providers who are doing it (ipv6.google.com
anyone?), what will be said of it then? Cliff is right in that the
type of system he describes would be absolutely fantastic to have, and
probably necessary to move a significant population segment. But I
submit that it will be a combination of factors the bring IPv6 to
fruition. There will be the R&E community who by and large DO run dual-
stack. When enough of us do it to represent a target to the commercial
world, then perhaps some other technologies for "translation" will be
available that allow more of the profit-bound world to come on board.
Simply put folks, there will not be a single solution. Be it
translation, dual-stack, something we've not thought of yet, it will
take more than one method for this to happen for us all. Perhaps we
should spend less time viewing the world as a big version of our
networks -- squabbling about why what worked for someone one work for
us (me included) -- and begin seeing this transition for what it is: A
long, multi-faceted change that will have many solutions. Let us
embrace those who have had the resources to adopt early. Dual-stack
may be a kludge for many, but if folks like me didn't actually run
dual-stack networks, we would have no real data about just how kludgey
it is, only speculation.
In response to the thread from Brother Farmer concerning IPv4
depletion already being upon us, in his world, with his business
model, and his networking strategy, it is true. But it isn't true for
everyone. I know several small ISPs, who will be the last to adopt
IPv6 and would see folks like Dave Farmer and Cort Buffington as
raging lunatics. Right now, they're struggling to find the services
that distinguish them from the AT&Ts and Time Warners of the world,
IPv6 is the LAST thing on their minds. But someday, the work the rest
of us do will benefit them as we will most assuredly have made just
about every major mistake possible trying to implement v6 by then.
Again, I believe that IPv6 is coming. And I believe that it will come
in due course for each of us at different times and different way.
Let's focus on getting there together, constructively, as a community
of leaders and problem solvers. To quote Benjamin Franklin, "We must
all hand together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately."
With that, ladies and gentlemen, I will conclude my soap-box for a few
more months :) Thank you to Brother Dave Farmer and Brother Cliff
Bedore for providing me context to twist to my own needs.
Thanking you for your time and this venue,
Cort
On Sep 4, 2008, at 9:18 PM, Cliff Bedore wrote:
> 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.
>
> Cliff
>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PPML
>> 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.
>>
>>
>
>
--
Cort Buffington
Interim Executive Director
The Kansas Research and Education Network
cort at kanren.net
Office: +1-785-856-9800 x301
Mobile: +1-785-865-7206
More information about the ARIN-PPML
mailing list