[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 2008-6: EmergencyTransferPolicyforIPv4 Addresses - Last Call

[michael.dillon at bt.com]

> I guess I am still waiting for someone to come up with the 
> killer application for IPv6.

It is called Voice-over-IP. On the PSTN, anyone in the world
can dial your number and make your phone ring. On the IPv4
Internet, this is hard to do because of widespread NAT. But
on the IPv6 Internet, we will once again have the flexibility
of the PSTN, without the need for huge centralised control
systems. This will enable the large ISPs, most of whom are
already PSTN operators of one sort or another, to dump
several generations of old technology (TDM, PDH, ISDN, ATM,
frame-relay, and even SDH) and replace it all with IPv6
based services. Why is this a killer app? Because it leads
to much deeper and widespread standardisation, thus enabling
much cheaper operating costs. This meets the market demand
for cheaper and cheaper voice communications costs.

Everything will run over IPv6 over Ethernet over fiber or
wireless. Got a hard drive at home that you want to access
from the office? Just mount it using iSCSI. Someone ring
your doorbell while you are on the beach in St. Tropez? 
Just connect to your intercom and ask them what they want.

All the pieces of this are out there already, it just takes
some vision to put it into play.

> I am afraid the major driver will be one of two things.  
> Either someone will offer porn content on IPv6 that is not 
> available on IPv4, or people will find that IPv6 P2P file 
> sharing will not have the restrictions or problems that it 
> does on IPv4.  If either of these comes to pass then the 
> public will clamor for IPv6.  

I don't believe in either of those scenarios. The IPv6 transition
is not like marketing a new product. It is fixing some issues
with the network infrastructure in order to enable new products
and in order to ensure continued growth of the network. Companies
are adding a new capability to their network. 

--Michael Dillon