[arin-ppml] IPv6 Heretic thoughts
Lee at Dilkie.com
Fri Sep 5 14:09:05 EDT 2008
Milton L Mueller wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Cort Buffington [mailto:cort at kanren.net]
>> I "translated" the concept of moving from IPv4 to IPv6 with my two-way
>> friend by comparing it to moving from 25kHz channels to 12.5kHz
>> channels in analog FM (for example),
> Yes, but this kind of change in fact WAS made repeatedly in the 2-way
> radio space, within the same spectrum. The situation was quite analogous
> to running out of IPv4 addresses. Instead of expanding the amount of
> spectrum used, specialized mobile radio operators made equipment and
> standards changes to enable more intensive use of existing spectrum. It
> is very similar to using NAT or some other reorg of existing address
I don't think the analogy is at all correct.
Radio spectrum has a physical hard limit and there is no substitution
(until subspace radio is invented). So obviously the effort has *always*
been to improve utilization of a fixed resource. I see no reason why
this won't continue.
The difference we have in the internet, we have an alternative in IPv6.
So the question that has yet to be answered is at what point(s) will the
cost/effort of deploying IPv6 outweigh the costs/effort of improving the
utilization of IPv4. I'm sure the answer to this will be "it depends"
and different folks will have different timelines for both solutions.
Personally. I think we are all worrying about this way too much. After
ARIN gives out it's last block, then you'll see a combination of IPv4
utilization improvements and IPv6 uptake. I don't foresee a panic or
anything like that.
More information about the ARIN-PPML